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.

Vampire Hunter & Vampire Raider are up, and are £32 each.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:
Now up at £32 a pop. Not too bad

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/searchResults?N=1683315211+2499837508+3206404541+3637769477

For a single one, FW resin, without even the parts for both? Allow me to disagree.

Beautiful looking kits, but that price. Oooof! Not surprising but still painful to see.

Are these about the size of a 40k jetbike?

Look to be about the size of a Thunderhawk

 Albertorius wrote:
For a single one, FW resin, without even the parts for both? Allow me to disagree.

Hmm, maybe I'm a bit punch drunk. Was expecting them to be £50...

 zedmeister wrote:
Look to be about the size of a Thunderhawk

 Albertorius wrote:
For a single one, FW resin, without even the parts for both? Allow me to disagree.

Hmm, maybe I'm a bit punch drunk. Was expecting them to be £50...

They clearly are close to Thunderhawk size. Price is "good" for FW kits.

You'll want the Vampire Raider anyway.

Some people will want both, simply because they try to have a large and varied collection.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Some people will want both, simply because they try to have a large and varied collection.

Then buy two. Don't see what's the problem.

The only people wanting to have all the options are generally those using magnets and playing (because that's the main reason they want to change the weapons with the minimum models needed).

If it's for collection, you'll buy 2 aircrafts because it's for the sake of exposing the 2, not changing the weapons on a whim.

right, I was responding to your statement of "You'll want the vampire raider anyway" to imply that most people would only buy 1 of them. I was demonstrating that thats not true and there are plenty of people who will buy 2 instead.

chaos0xomega wrote:
right, I was responding to your statement of "You'll want the vampire raider anyway" to imply that most people would only buy 1 of them. I was demonstrating that thats not true and there are plenty of people who will buy 2 instead.

My statement was for those who want to play (and optimize). Those are the ones using magnets to change weapons.

And I think they'll want to play the Raider anyway instead of the Hunter, simply because the first is way more versatile and useful in game. The latter isn't especially bad in itself (both vampire do remove the main weakness of eldars because of their high structure points), but everyone playing current ruleset of AI knows that it's better to use weapons rolling more dice...

Sarouan wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
Look to be about the size of a Thunderhawk

 Albertorius wrote:
For a single one, FW resin, without even the parts for both? Allow me to disagree.

Hmm, maybe I'm a bit punch drunk. Was expecting them to be £50...

They clearly are close to Thunderhawk size. Price is "good" for FW kits.

They look a bit smaller than the TH to me, but similar ballpark I guess.

$74AUD, which is expensive for what it is, but cheap for FW I guess, that's the same price as the TH over here.

You'll want the Vampire Raider anyway.

Isn't the Hunter better in any mission that doesn't require a transport capacity?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Isn't the Hunter better in any mission that doesn't require a transport capacity?

He costs more and his weapons don't synergize very well, on the opposite of the raider with basic weapons.

Remember that you hit on 5+ at best in current AI. That's why the hunter's twin linked pulsars is a bit of a gamble.

Sarouan wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Isn't the Hunter better in any mission that doesn't require a transport capacity?

He costs more and his weapons don't synergize very well, on the opposite of the raider with basic weapons.

Remember that you hit on 5+ at best in current AI. That's why the hunter's twin linked pulsars is a bit of a gamble.

I still don't have the companion, I was just guessing based on the old rules where both the Raider and Hunter had short to medium ranged weapons. What is the FPR and DMG of each of them? Have you checked the average damage output at each range? Sometimes what looks like poor synergy still results in better overall damage output.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Sarouan wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Isn't the Hunter better in any mission that doesn't require a transport capacity?

He costs more and his weapons don't synergize very well, on the opposite of the raider with basic weapons.

Remember that you hit on 5+ at best in current AI. That's why the hunter's twin linked pulsars is a bit of a gamble.

I still don't have the companion, I was just guessing based on the old rules where both the Raider and Hunter had short to medium ranged weapons. What is the FPR and DMG of each of them? Have you checked the average damage output at each range? Sometimes what looks like poor synergy still results in better overall damage output.

The Raider definitely has more short range firepower and synergises well with the Asuryani playstyle so I can see this being the optimum choice as it's a tough transport with 14 shots at close range. The Hunter is more mid-ranged but I don't feel mid-range is where Asuryani shine. Weight of shots is key in the game, you'd be better off paying for a Hemlock to abuse its extra damage ability.

A little miffed that the Vampires are as pricey as they are. I get that it's a big bird and FW, but really?

 Tyranid Horde wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Sarouan wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Isn't the Hunter better in any mission that doesn't require a transport capacity?

He costs more and his weapons don't synergize very well, on the opposite of the raider with basic weapons.

Remember that you hit on 5+ at best in current AI. That's why the hunter's twin linked pulsars is a bit of a gamble.

I still don't have the companion, I was just guessing based on the old rules where both the Raider and Hunter had short to medium ranged weapons. What is the FPR and DMG of each of them? Have you checked the average damage output at each range? Sometimes what looks like poor synergy still results in better overall damage output.

The Raider definitely has more short range firepower and synergises well with the Asuryani playstyle so I can see this being the optimum choice as it's a tough transport with 14 shots at close range. The Hunter is more mid-ranged but I don't feel mid-range is where Asuryani shine. Weight of shots is key in the game, you'd be better off paying for a Hemlock to abuse its extra damage ability.

Fair enough, I guess the up side to GW botching the rules so one unit is clearly better than the other is it reduces the number of models you need to buy to make a flexible army.

Though I don't think it's great to have all your forces focused on the same range, especially when that range is short, as I reckon it's harder to keep all models in the same range than some models at medium and some models at short. As far as I'm aware there's no AoE effects in AI that would benefit you keeping models close together.

A little miffed that the Vampires are as pricey as they are. I get that it's a big bird and FW, but really?

By size, I think the pricing isn't bad for FW standards compared to other AI stuff (though I think it's maybe smaller than people are thinking, some of the images where the base looks photoshopped on makes the model look larger than it looks in the 3D view).

However, by points, I think you'd actually want 2 or 3 Vampires in a force, as Eldar suffer from rather poor points-per-structure, and the Vampires give a healthy boost of 5 structure for 33pts. And if you're buying 2 or 3 of them, the price is pretty painful. Based on what you guys have said I would want 2 Raiders and 1 Hunter if price wasn't an issue, but $222AUD for only ~100pts of models is a bit much.

Saw this photo size comparison on twitter. Didn’t realise how big the new ships actually are.

I often think that’s something GW miss in their product photos, and think they seem much better value once you see the size/bits in the kit, if not still on the expensive side.

Photo credit to @canyourollacrit on Twitter.

Ac4155 wrote:
Saw this photo size comparison on twitter. Didn’t realise how big the new ships actually are.

I often think that’s something GW miss in their product photos, and think they seem much better value once you see the size/bits in the kit, if not still on the expensive side.

Photo credit to @canyourollacrit on Twitter.

The Nightwing is one of the smaller aircraft to be using as a comparison.

But yeah, GW should show some squadron photos to get an idea of the relative size of aircraft.

They should really be using a Primaris marine as a comparison. I didn't know the size of the AI Thunderhawk until I saw it next to a marine. I have no clue how big that small Eldar craft is, so I'm still none the wiser as to the size of the larger one.

JWBS wrote:
They should really be using a Primaris marine as a comparison. I didn't know the size of the AI Thunderhawk until I saw it next to a marine. I have no clue how big that small Eldar craft is, so I'm still none the wiser as to the size of the larger one.

I must be one of the few wargamers that doesn't own a single Primaris marine But yeah maybe it'd be nice to have them next to a 32mm scale model for comparison.

Alright, that's big. £32 not bad for a Forgeworld price after all then.

 zedmeister wrote:
Alright, that's big. £32 not bad for a Forgeworld price after all then.

Just received my Vampires. Even after having seen the pictures, they are still bigger than I expected. And they are pretty.

TheGoodGerman wrote:


Just received my Vampires. Even after having seen the pictures, they are still bigger than I expected. And they are pretty.

Any chance of a picture of the components you get?

 zedmeister wrote:

TheGoodGerman wrote:


Just received my Vampires. Even after having seen the pictures, they are still bigger than I expected. And they are pretty.

Any chance of a picture of the components you get?

Can do that when I‘m home, probably taking a pic of the assembly guides. But it‘s not too exciting to see. The fuselage and wings is just one big part, with the guns, engine bits (to cover casting gates at the back) and vertical fins being separate (plus the missile array for the version where it‘s optional, but I don‘t see a reason to not glue it on).

Oh good, glad the fuselage is one piece. The old AI came in two pieces with the cockpit part seperate and with the resin gates positioned in such a way that you'd usually end up with an unsightly join across the top. And if you're as bad at filling as I am, it looked hideous and I ended up selling them...

Eldar Vampire Hunter (left) and Raider (right) parts. Sorry for the reflections, but you can see what‘s there.

Thanks!

Here is one overlaid on a 60mm base for anyone still wondering about size.

Man I'm at my wits end with FW. Both mine came with bent or fully broken tips at the front. They must think I'm a scammer they get so many replacement requests from me. Killing me.

axotl wrote:
Man I'm at my wits end with FW. Both mine came with bent or fully broken tips at the front. They must think I'm a scammer they get so many replacement requests from me. Killing me.

Show them a picture, it's enough proof.


Do the vampires come in blisters or boxes ? Was wondering given the size, even more now that I know the main body is in one piece.

Thanks for the pic Lurch. It looks like it's about 10 cm across. I might have to pick some up and finally dip my toe into AI.

10.5cm across and they come in boxes