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.

BrianDavion wrote:
one model I can think of that's been totally retconned... rogue trader era Custodes.

If you fielded Rogue Trader era Custodes would you be laughed out of a store? Aside from their weird bondage gear of course - more of their representation/size/etc

I still haven't seen any older depictions of of models that aren't allowed anymore as their modern counterparts - only models (or weapons) that no longer have rules. I suppose you can proxy anything as anything if your opponent (or TO) agrees. Canon-wise it can all be written off as variant, modifications, evolutions, regional differences etc.

There were a few Thunder Warrior models; one might still being sold if the 'Armor Through The Ages' set hasn't been withdrawn.

I don't think they ever had rules.

Ork Madboyz and Boar Boyz come to mind. I imagine they may still be canon, but without rules.

I've got one of the old 'ninja' assassin models lying around. It's armed with a combi-weapon and a sword though, so he could counts-as Erversor pretty easily.

 insaniak wrote:
There's still a Blood Slaughterer, it's just a Forgeworld model and considerably larger and different looking.

I think the only things those two models have in common are their names.

I mean, once upon a time the Eldar had a unit called a dreadnought, but that model basically became the Wraithlord in later editions. The old wheeled Blood Slaughterer just got quietly forgotten and someone reused the name with all the thought for continuity of someone reviving a dead tech company.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Ork Madboyz and Boar Boyz come to mind. I imagine they may still be canon, but without rules.

I've got one of the old 'ninja' assassin models lying around. It's armed with a combi-weapon and a sword though, so he could counts-as Erversor pretty easily.

eh boar boyz counts as ork bikers. people already do that with fantasy, but yea no official boar boyz coming back.

GW effectively retconned the original Broadside models out of existence.

The original Broadside model had the designation XV88, which indicates that it is a variant of the XV8 chassis. Forgeworld released the XV88-2, again based on the XV8 chassis, with the 2 signifying that it was an evolution of the XV88 design.

Then GW released the new Broadside kit. It is substantially larger than the Crisis models and previous Broadside kits, yet it retains the XV88 code. That indicates that GW did not understand why Broadsides were originally given the designation XV88 (Imperial equivalent would be the Razorback getting an update and being the size of a Land Raider despite the fluff still indicating that it is a rhino chassis variant) and these new Broadside kits are not a variant or new development of the Broadside, since then it would be XV88-3 or XV98 (and with their current size them being a variant on the XV9 suit would make more sense).

Since it makes no sense for military hardware to have identical designations despite being vastly different (think of the logistics nightmares it would create if you had two different tanks with identical designations and you needed replacement parts for one of them), the logical explanation is that the original XV88 no longer ever existed and Broadsides always looked like the new model.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


Since it makes no sense for military hardware to have identical designations despite being vastly different (think of the logistics nightmares it would create if you had two different tanks with identical designations and you needed replacement parts for one of them), the logical explanation is that the original XV88 no longer ever existed and Broadsides always looked like the new model.

Well, there's examples of designations bein' reused after initial design was abandoned/long retired:

T-34 light tank (1933) and T-34 medium tank (1940)

T-80 light tank (1944) and T-80 MBT (1977)

B-2 seaplane (190?) and B-2 strategic bomber (1989)

B-21 bomber (1936) and new B-21 strategic bomber

M1 Combat Car (light tank) (1935) and M1 MBT (1980)

M2 Combat Car (light tank) (version of M1) and M2 Bradley IFV

And this is only USSR and USA designations i remember right off the bat.

Look up all the ships denoted Enterprise (IRL).

Bharring wrote:
Look up all the ships denoted Enterprise (IRL).

None of them are active at the same time as each other, though.

Similar with the tanks, plus for those which were active at the same time they likely share parts/chassis etc.

Which is not true for the Broadsides considering the massive differences between the iterations.

M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, M1 Thompson?

Harbringerxv8 wrote:
M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, M1 Thompson?

These weren't the official designations, though. The Garand was the "U.S. rifle, caliber .30, M1", for example. Also, the M usually stands for "model" or "mark", so it's not surprising that it's in a lot of equipments' names.

Going back to naval designations, the XV88 is a class designation. Check out Captain Brown's excellent p and m blog on his conversion of a ww2 Flowers class corvette to see the kinds of pretty substantial differences that developed in the same class of ship over the course of a few years of war for a single country. Multiply that over hundreds or thousands of years of time and whatever distance in lightyear and you could easily have substantially different looking chassis with similar armaments sharing a designation.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/774273.page

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
None of them are active at the same time as each other, though.

Similar with the tanks, plus for those which were active at the same time they likely share parts/chassis etc.

Technically Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger refers both to what we today call boxy Tiger I (which funnily enough itself has 2 very different variants, Porsche and Henschel ones) and to much larger Tiger II. To make it even funnier the difference in designation was only in (often omitted) note stating 'variant E' (Tiger I) and 'variant B' (Tiger II) despite II being two years later chronologically. Go figure

TarkinLarson wrote:
I still haven't seen any older depictions of of models that aren't allowed anymore as their modern counterparts - only models (or weapons) that no longer have rules.

Eh, fielding ancient "greater" daemons as modern unit with big statline is kind of dick move, especially with ease of hiding behind something as small as Rhino. I wouldn't have a problem if the model was used as daemon prince, or hellbrute, or something, but vastly larger greater daemon? I'd at least roll my eyes.