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.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
If Guardsmen can have walkers so can Astartes. That's all there is to it.

The Sentinel is a light scouting unit for an expendable driver, it makes sense for it to be lightly armored.

The new totally-not-a-dread is a heavy walker with significant armor, it just has a giant "shoot me here" sign with no armor for the driver and a much less expendable marine at risk. And that's not even counting the stupidity of heavy bolter pistols held in a powerfist...

rule of cool man, chain swords are also a dumb design

 posermcbogus wrote:
The stocky bulk of the classic marine feels very fitting. They have huge armored plates on their chests and shoulders, and their poses kind of reflect that sense of weight, which feels proportional to their size.

Disagree. Old marines don't feel heavy, they feel deformed. They look like exactly what they are: deformed anatomically impossible suits of armor made by people who don't understand how human proportions work. It was a little more excusable in 1980 when everyone sucked at sculpting, GW's designers included, and you had a bunch of vaguely marine-shaped blobs in awkward poses designed to work within the limits of very basic metal casting tools. But unfortunately when GW moved to plastic they tried to keep the new kits in line with those failures instead of starting over with a clean slate. Primaris marines, despite their idiotic fluff, do a much better job of capturing the space marine aesthetic but without the terrible sculpting errors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
rule of cool man, chain swords are also a dumb design

Rule of cool only goes so far. Chainswords are properly grimdark and look cool. The new walker looks like a cheap happy meal toy or one of those Russian not-40k ripoffs, there's nothing cool about it.

You'd think they would at least put some bullet-resistant glass or an armor plate with a visor in front of the guy so he isn't a walking missile launcher target.

 Peregrine wrote:

 posermcbogus wrote:
The stocky bulk of the classic marine feels very fitting. They have huge armored plates on their chests and shoulders, and their poses kind of reflect that sense of weight, which feels proportional to their size.

Disagree. Old marines don't feel heavy, they feel deformed. They look like exactly what they are: deformed anatomically impossible suits of armor made by people who don't understand how human proportions work. It was a little more excusable in 1980 when everyone sucked at sculpting, GW's designers included, and you had a bunch of vaguely marine-shaped blobs in awkward poses designed to work within the limits of very basic metal casting tools. But unfortunately when GW moved to plastic they tried to keep the new kits in line with those failures instead of starting over with a clean slate. Primaris marines, despite their idiotic fluff, do a much better job of capturing the space marine aesthetic but without the terrible sculpting errors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
rule of cool man, chain swords are also a dumb design

Rule of cool only goes so far. Chainswords are properly grimdark and look cool. The new walker looks like a cheap happy meal toy or one of those Russian not-40k ripoffs, there's nothing cool about it.

other people disagree and think it's awesome, but I suppose only Peegrines opinion counts.

BrianDavion wrote:
other people disagree and think it's awesome, but I suppose only Peegrines opinion counts.

I guess only their opinion counts when you're posting "rule of cool" without any disclaimer that it's only one opinion and all other opinions are also valid?

^In this case Peregrene is right. It really does look like a happy meal toy.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
You'd think they would at least put some bullet-resistant glass or an armor plate with a visor in front of the guy so he isn't a walking missile launcher target.

Far be it from me to defend it, but it's designed the same way the land speeder is designed.

Marine armour is as tough as the vehicle's armour.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
If Guardsmen can have walkers so can Astartes. That's all there is to it.

The Sentinel is a light scouting unit for an expendable driver, it makes sense for it to be lightly armored.

The new totally-not-a-dread is a heavy walker with significant armor, it just has a giant "shoot me here" sign with no armor for the driver and a much less expendable marine at risk. And that's not even counting the stupidity of heavy bolter pistols held in a powerfist...

They seem to be doing a silly throw-back to the old Space marine armor is good enough a la speeders, so not having an additional armor plate would allow for reduced weight. We know when a Sentinel is armored, it loses the ability to Go Recon, it’s Scout Walker rule, and a toughness. As they have explained, since it can infiltrate, that means it’s an ambush mech. Better field-of-view allows better capability to see targets.

Do I agree that “Marine armor is good enough” is silly? Yes, but it’s established. One could also reason that should the Invictor mech be disabled (although I don’t think the marine will get a Canis Rex pilot ejection rule), it would be much easier to remove the pilot or for the pilot to make an escape.

From a fluff point of view, I wonder if there is any difference in control capability between the pilot using those joysticks and a Redemptor "pilot" interred and connected presumably through a neural connection?

I don't mind the new Primaris proportions, it's more that they look so much higher tech than classic marine. Old marines were heavy and blocky. I really liked that for the power armor and terminators. Dreads were a bit too boxy for my tastes, but still looked good and fit in. The new armor looks more like fitted suits and mechs. I like their appearances in a vacuum, but not when sitting beside old marine sculpts (except that roll cage, give me an armored cockpit anyday).

The only Primaris models I really dislike are the Suppressors. Those harnesses just don't look right, don't look Marine-y, and don't give good flying poses.

 Peregrine wrote:

 posermcbogus wrote:
The stocky bulk of the classic marine feels very fitting. They have huge armored plates on their chests and shoulders, and their poses kind of reflect that sense of weight, which feels proportional to their size.

Disagree. Old marines don't feel heavy, they feel deformed. They look like exactly what they are: deformed anatomically impossible suits of armor made by people who don't understand how human proportions work. It was a little more excusable in 1980 when everyone sucked at sculpting, GW's designers included, and you had a bunch of vaguely marine-shaped blobs in awkward poses designed to work within the limits of very basic metal casting tools. But unfortunately when GW moved to plastic they tried to keep the new kits in line with those failures instead of starting over with a clean slate. Primaris marines, despite their idiotic fluff, do a much better job of capturing the space marine aesthetic but without the terrible sculpting errors.

Gonna have to disagree there. I think the slightly-off proportions of heroic scale suit classic space marines down to the ground. It really invokes the sillier early artwork, but also is very practical in terms of tabletop identification (and, I would say, brand identification). The oversized head, shoulders and weapons allow one to quickly identify loadout, chapter, and project a personality onto the figure. With the primaris marines, the pauldrons look smaller, reducing the ease of chapter identification, while the sudden proportionality of the weapons means that quickly identifying the deluge of new bolter-type weapons is a lot trickier off the bat.
With heroic scale, GW had something unique, and very distinctive. It added a bit of goofy-ness to an otherwise very bleak setting, and works nicely on the tabletop. While there's nothing wrong with better proportioned kits of late - DKoK, Admech, GSC etc. - I think heroic proportions worked for GW, and am not sure why they felt the need to do away with them. Particular when, with the HH resins, those issues with stance really melted away.
If ya wanna go down that road, I'll wager that none of the primaris apologists ever particularly consider Aggressors or Gravis armor when talking about 'improved proportions', while intercessors' heads are too small, their waists too thin, their thighs too thick, their chests too barrel shaped, their shoulders too broad and their arms too short - could a primaris marine touch his own elbow? Their was a deliberate, measured silliness with heroic scale classic marines. It's clear with the new wave of tacticool marines that GW are no longer making silly designs deliberately, but in an attempt to appeal seemingly to whoever still plays call of duty.

Going a bit further, because I've just looked at the new stuff today, and I'm SALTY AS ALL HELL - what is up with the stealth marines? Why is GW pushing the covert ops stuff so hard? You have a terrifying, what, 9-foot tall now? superhuman, brainwashed into a murder machine, an angel of death used to subjugate entire galaxies, decked out in ceramite and proud of their chapter to their dying breath. What are they doing sneaking about, and using sound-supression. To an extent, I don't mind ravenguard/Deathwatch sneakiness, because it culminates in a sudden burst of calculated, strategic violence, and works within the character of shock-and-awe, strength through sheer overwhelming strength. Sound dampening, camo-wearing, sneaky sneaky marines don't sit well with me. Leave scurrying around to the scouts or the guardsmen. A marine should face his enemy, scream at him until his teeth shake, advance into his bullets before putting a bolter round into his head.

 Apple Peel wrote:
They seem to be doing a silly throw-back to the old Space marine armor is good enough a la speeders, so not having an additional armor plate would allow for reduced weight.

That doesn't make any sense because the rest of the walker is still armored. The open cockpit removes a relatively small amount of armor in exchange for a massive weak point, since even if the driver won't be killed by a hit it's definitely got a bunch of vulnerable controls systems and angles to get a shot in behind the armor plates and such. It reads much less as "light scout walker that sacrifices armor for speed" and more like a $5 toy that should have a bunch of marketing hype about how cool it is that you can open the cockpit and put your action figures inside. It's a design and everyone involved should be ashamed of it.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
They seem to be doing a silly throw-back to the old Space marine armor is good enough a la speeders, so not having an additional armor plate would allow for reduced weight.

That doesn't make any sense because the rest of the walker is still armored. The open cockpit removes a relatively small amount of armor in exchange for a massive weak point, since even if the driver won't be killed by a hit it's definitely got a bunch of vulnerable controls systems and angles to get a shot in behind the armor plates and such. It reads much less as "light scout walker that sacrifices armor for speed" and more like a $5 toy that should have a bunch of marketing hype about how cool it is that you can open the cockpit and put your action figures inside. It's a design and everyone involved should be ashamed of it.

Are you trying to tell me that the Invictor is just as well armored as the Redemptor? I won’t argue design aesthetic, as that differs from person to person.

 Apple Peel wrote:
Are you trying to tell me that the Invictor is just as well armored as the Redemptor? I won’t argue design aesthetic, as that differs from person to person.

No, it's not as well armored, but it still has a lot of armor plates. It makes zero sense to put armor on random parts of the walker and leave other vital areas completely exposed.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
Are you trying to tell me that the Invictor is just as well armored as the Redemptor? I won’t argue design aesthetic, as that differs from person to person.

No, it's not as well armored, but it still has a lot of armor plates. It makes zero sense to put armor on random parts of the walker and leave other vital areas completely exposed.

Reduced weight and a smaller profile. It’s not supposed to be a frontline brawler, but an ambush mech. It performs the job, hopefully successful, and probably bugs out afterwards.
Besides, looking at the picture, there is not too much vital stuff being exposed in comparison. The spots where limbs attached to joints and such are covered. The ankles didn’t really change. The thigh area is mostly solid metal anyway.

I suspect it'll have less wounds and a lower toughness then the redemptor. if you look at it it loos like they took the basic redemptor frame, stuck a cockpit on it (realisticly it should not work as smoothly as a dread without the MIU) and cut down the armor plating to over cover key areas such as joints etc

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
They seem to be doing a silly throw-back to the old Space marine armor is good enough a la speeders, so not having an additional armor plate would allow for reduced weight.

That doesn't make any sense because the rest of the walker is still armored. The open cockpit removes a relatively small amount of armor in exchange for a massive weak point, since even if the driver won't be killed by a hit it's definitely got a bunch of vulnerable controls systems and angles to get a shot in behind the armor plates and such. It reads much less as "light scout walker that sacrifices armor for speed" and more like a $5 toy that should have a bunch of marketing hype about how cool it is that you can open the cockpit and put your action figures inside. It's a design and everyone involved should be ashamed of it.

Are you trying to tell me that the Invictor is just as well armored as the Redemptor? I won’t argue design aesthetic, as that differs from person to person.

Where's that size comparison come from? I don't recall seeing anything like that on the Community website.

Also, I'm with Peregrine on this: why are the shoulders armoured while the pilot is exposed? By what rationale are shoulder joints more vital to its function than the pilot who controls said joints? It would make a lot more sense if the entire chassis was exposed.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^In this case Peregrene is right. It really does look like a happy meal toy.

It's hard for me to hate on the design when so much in the game is just goofy looking, from the flying shoe speeder to the wolf snout flyer that looks like little more than a cargo container with guns and engines in space ! Really you could fill the pages with odd design calls. The flying cathedral DA speeder, teen wolves, tanks from WW1, higgins landing craft, etc etc forever.

It really ends up being do you like this brand of goofy from model to model. Which is always an opinion issue. Though I think the new walker is straight outta the Matrix, that marine must have just been defending Zion !! Damn machines won't be using my chapter as batteries, we gotta hold the line for Neo !!

 Ginjitzu wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
They seem to be doing a silly throw-back to the old Space marine armor is good enough a la speeders, so not having an additional armor plate would allow for reduced weight.

That doesn't make any sense because the rest of the walker is still armored. The open cockpit removes a relatively small amount of armor in exchange for a massive weak point, since even if the driver won't be killed by a hit it's definitely got a bunch of vulnerable controls systems and angles to get a shot in behind the armor plates and such. It reads much less as "light scout walker that sacrifices armor for speed" and more like a $5 toy that should have a bunch of marketing hype about how cool it is that you can open the cockpit and put your action figures inside. It's a design and everyone involved should be ashamed of it.

Are you trying to tell me that the Invictor is just as well armored as the Redemptor? I won’t argue design aesthetic, as that differs from person to person.

Where's that size comparison come from? I don't recall seeing anything like that on the Community website.

Also, I'm with Peregrine on this: why are the shoulders armoured while the pilot is exposed? By what rationale are shoulder joints more vital to its function than the pilot who controls said joints? It would make a lot more sense if the entire chassis was exposed.

I just pulled a pic from google that had both in it.

If you notice, all the areas that either house engine type things (the bulk of the torso/chest) or areas responsible for a lot of directional articulations (shoulders, knees, wrists, groin) are armored.

Again, GW is falling back on “Marine armor is good enough.” That’s why there is no protection. The power armor is good enough. They’ve been doing that for years.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If you shoot either of the shoulders and it’s unarmored, the arms would probably fall off or go limp. Same with the legs. Then it would be useless.

AngryAngel80 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^In this case Peregrene is right. It really does look like a happy meal toy.

It's hard for me to hate on the design when so much in the game is just goofy looking, from the flying shoe speeder to the wolf snout flyer that looks like little more than a cargo container with guns and engines in space ! Really you could fill the pages with odd design calls. The flying cathedral DA speeder, teen wolves, tanks from WW1, higgins landing craft, etc etc forever.

It really ends up being do you like this brand of goofy from model to model. Which is always an opinion issue. Though I think the new walker is straight outta the Matrix, that marine must have just been defending Zion !! Damn machines won't be using my chapter as batteries, we gotta hold the line for Neo !!

The model line having some stinkers is not an excuse for further stinkers. Almost everything you mentioned were shoehorned in to bulk out a model line.

There were serviceable wulfen models from 3rd ed that could have had an update rather then the complete redesign we got. The Marines already had Thunderhawks and didn't need smaller transports from a lore standpoint- but Geedubs wanted to cram fliers into standard games at 28mm. The new abominable DA specific units ... the new Primaris range are a continuation of these errors.

Jamming aerials and external targeters over marine armour makes the armour itself look more low tech than we've been told it is. They wanted to visually communicate 'extra comms' and 'extra targetting' and executed this in the most visually obvious way possible on models that alreadty have problems.

Compare this to the Skitarri- with decades of mechanicus imagery to draw from, they got the core troops to look very nice. The only criticism you normally hear is that the robes are a bit starched. When GW gives us something that's been in the lore for a while and that artists may have had a crack at, they generally put out good stuff. When they try to fill codex entries, We get dreadknights and planes with churches bolted on. When they ignore codex entries that already exist and double up - we get centurions and scout dreads eating the lunch of terminators and landspeeders.

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
They seem to be doing a silly throw-back to the old Space marine armor is good enough a la speeders, so not having an additional armor plate would allow for reduced weight.

That doesn't make any sense because the rest of the walker is still armored. The open cockpit removes a relatively small amount of armor in exchange for a massive weak point, since even if the driver won't be killed by a hit it's definitely got a bunch of vulnerable controls systems and angles to get a shot in behind the armor plates and such. It reads much less as "light scout walker that sacrifices armor for speed" and more like a $5 toy that should have a bunch of marketing hype about how cool it is that you can open the cockpit and put your action figures inside. It's a design and everyone involved should be ashamed of it.

Are you trying to tell me that the Invictor is just as well armored as the Redemptor? I won’t argue design aesthetic, as that differs from person to person.

Where's that size comparison come from? I don't recall seeing anything like that on the Community website.

Also, I'm with Peregrine on this: why are the shoulders armoured while the pilot is exposed? By what rationale are shoulder joints more vital to its function than the pilot who controls said joints? It would make a lot more sense if the entire chassis was exposed.

I just pulled a pic from google that had both in it.

If you notice, all the areas that either house engine type things (the bulk of the torso/chest) or areas responsible for a lot of directional articulations (shoulders, knees, wrists, groin) are armored.

Again, GW is falling back on “Marine armor is good enough.” That’s why there is no protection. The power armor is good enough. They’ve been doing that for years.

The main problem I have with that argument is the presence of joysticks for the pilot. Apart from being a really dumb control system for a walker (seriously, how is he independently controlling both arms and the body-mounted weapons with a single stick and throttle?) the controls are now exposed to any random bit of shrapnel or stray bullet. It's all very well saying the pilot's armour will protect him from that sort of attack but he's not going to last very long when his mech is sitting there immobile because the exposed control systems got dinged by lucky shot from a lasgun.

 posermcbogus wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 posermcbogus wrote:
The stocky bulk of the classic marine feels very fitting. They have huge armored plates on their chests and shoulders, and their poses kind of reflect that sense of weight, which feels proportional to their size.

Disagree. Old marines don't feel heavy, they feel deformed. They look like exactly what they are: deformed anatomically impossible suits of armor made by people who don't understand how human proportions work. It was a little more excusable in 1980 when everyone sucked at sculpting, GW's designers included, and you had a bunch of vaguely marine-shaped blobs in awkward poses designed to work within the limits of very basic metal casting tools. But unfortunately when GW moved to plastic they tried to keep the new kits in line with those failures instead of starting over with a clean slate. Primaris marines, despite their idiotic fluff, do a much better job of capturing the space marine aesthetic but without the terrible sculpting errors.

Gonna have to disagree there. I think the slightly-off proportions of heroic scale suit classic space marines down to the ground. It really invokes the sillier early artwork, but also is very practical in terms of tabletop identification (and, I would say, brand identification). The oversized head, shoulders and weapons allow one to quickly identify loadout, chapter, and project a personality onto the figure. With the primaris marines, the pauldrons look smaller, reducing the ease of chapter identification, while the sudden proportionality of the weapons means that quickly identifying the deluge of new bolter-type weapons is a lot trickier off the bat.
With heroic scale, GW had something unique, and very distinctive. It added a bit of goofy-ness to an otherwise very bleak setting, and works nicely on the tabletop. While there's nothing wrong with better proportioned kits of late - DKoK, Admech, GSC etc. - I think heroic proportions worked for GW, and am not sure why they felt the need to do away with them. Particular when, with the HH resins, those issues with stance really melted away.
If ya wanna go down that road, I'll wager that none of the primaris apologists ever particularly consider Aggressors or Gravis armor when talking about 'improved proportions', while intercessors' heads are too small, their waists too thin, their thighs too thick, their chests too barrel shaped, their shoulders too broad and their arms too short - could a primaris marine touch his own elbow? Their was a deliberate, measured silliness with heroic scale classic marines. It's clear with the new wave of tacticool marines that GW are no longer making silly designs deliberately, but in an attempt to appeal seemingly to whoever still plays call of duty.

Going a bit further, because I've just looked at the new stuff today, and I'm SALTY AS ALL HELL - what is up with the stealth marines? Why is GW pushing the covert ops stuff so hard? You have a terrifying, what, 9-foot tall now? superhuman, brainwashed into a murder machine, an angel of death used to subjugate entire galaxies, decked out in ceramite and proud of their chapter to their dying breath. What are they doing sneaking about, and using sound-supression. To an extent, I don't mind ravenguard/Deathwatch sneakiness, because it culminates in a sudden burst of calculated, strategic violence, and works within the character of shock-and-awe, strength through sheer overwhelming strength. Sound dampening, camo-wearing, sneaky sneaky marines don't sit well with me. Leave scurrying around to the scouts or the guardsmen. A marine should face his enemy, scream at him until his teeth shake, advance into his bullets before putting a bolter round into his head.

Also some of the spec ops stuff is just bad. I mean look at the gun from the minecarrying corpselover and tell me that visor looks good.

They ought to give the not-dreadnought Explodes! rules on a 4+ (with a 3" range, 1 mortal wound), but if it doesn't explode the marine inside can step out and be used as a single figure w/ heavy bolter.

Overall though, I could do without the model entirely.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
If Guardsmen can have walkers so can Astartes. That's all there is to it.

The Sentinel is a light scouting unit for an expendable driver, it makes sense for it to be lightly armored.

The new totally-not-a-dread is a heavy walker with significant armor, it just has a giant "shoot me here" sign with no armor for the driver and a much less expendable marine at risk. And that's not even counting the stupidity of heavy bolter pistols held in a powerfist...

Except it's not a front-line vehicles so your complaint is redundant.

 Ishagu wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
If Guardsmen can have walkers so can Astartes. That's all there is to it.

The Sentinel is a light scouting unit for an expendable driver, it makes sense for it to be lightly armored.

The new totally-not-a-dread is a heavy walker with significant armor, it just has a giant "shoot me here" sign with no armor for the driver and a much less expendable marine at risk. And that's not even counting the stupidity of heavy bolter pistols held in a powerfist...

Except it's not a front-line vehicles so your complaint is redundant.

Scusme but if it is not a frontline vehicle, wtf bother to put a gun on it?

Because it's an anti infantry attack walker that flanks enemies.

There are more flawed designs than this, you need to get over it or simply ignore it. There are also real military vehicles that offer no protection for their drivers in use today.

 Ishagu wrote:
Because it's an anti infantry attack walker that flanks enemies.

There are more flawed designs than this, you need to get over it or simply ignore it. There are also real military vehicles that offer no protection for their drivers in use today.

A flanking vehicle to go for combat scenarios is not a frontline vehicle?

Tell me, Is a STUG III or a STUH also not a combat vehicle because it mostly lay in ambush?

And yes a Jeep offers maybee no protection but that is mostly due to SPEED beeing the idea behind it.
Even motorized infantry started armoring their Camions. (btw how we got the IFV, and by extension this piece of gak, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mowag_Duro which is hillariously tight and if uparmored has a dangerous tendency to flip over in curves.)


This vehicle is dumb even by 40k standards.

 Ishagu wrote:
Because it's an anti infantry attack walker that flanks enemies.

There are more flawed designs than this, you need to get over it or simply ignore it. There are also real military vehicles that offer no protection for their drivers in use today.

Marine bikes and landspeeders, which rely on speed and are not designed to tank hits, still offer protection for the operators. The marine driver sits behind a shield in both cases, with angled armour all around. Even the imperial guard sentinel has the pilot elevated in an armoured cab so that small arms fire coming from ground level will have a hard time striking him.

Real military vehicles that offer little/no protection are not designed to be shot at, and are deployed accordingly.

This scoutnaught gets caught in any kind of blast and the joystick and throttle are shredded, even if the marine is fine. If it was lugging around a whirlwind missile battery and was designed to be far away from the front, firing indirectly- it would still be competing with the tracked whirlwind but whatever. Its armed with machineguns, which are designed to kill infantry, but it looks vulnerable to light arms and grenadelaunchers. It is nonsensical. Why would you ever use this and not an upgunned scout speeder?

 =Angel= wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Because it's an anti infantry attack walker that flanks enemies.

There are more flawed designs than this, you need to get over it or simply ignore it. There are also real military vehicles that offer no protection for their drivers in use today.

Marine bikes and landspeeders, which rely on speed and are not designed to tank hits, still offer protection for the operators. The marine driver sits behind a shield in both cases, with angled armour all around. Even the imperial guard sentinel has the pilot elevated in an armoured cab so that small arms fire coming from ground level will have a hard time striking him.

Real military vehicles that offer little/no protection are not designed to be shot at, and are deployed accordingly.

This scoutnaught gets caught in any kind of blast and the joystick and throttle are shredded, even if the marine is fine. If it was lugging around a whirlwind missile battery and was designed to be far away from the front, firing indirectly- it would still be competing with the tracked whirlwind but whatever. Its armed with machineguns, which are designed to kill infantry, but it looks vulnerable to light arms and grenadelaunchers. It is nonsensical. Why would you ever use this and not an upgunned scout speeder?

It wouldn't even make sense for beeing amobile piece or artillery.
Counter battery fire is a thing. And when your Artillery can get shredded by a HE / Shrappnel round then it basically is worthless.
Otoh the whirlwind atleast has some armour.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Because it's an anti infantry attack walker that flanks enemies.

There are more flawed designs than this, you need to get over it or simply ignore it. There are also real military vehicles that offer no protection for their drivers in use today.

A flanking vehicle to go for combat scenarios is not a frontline vehicle?

Tell me, Is a STUG III or a STUH also not a combat vehicle because it mostly lay in ambush?

And yes a Jeep offers maybee no protection but that is mostly due to SPEED beeing the idea behind it.
Even motorized infantry started armoring their Camions. (btw how we got the IFV, and by extension this piece of gak, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mowag_Duro which is hillariously tight and if uparmored has a dangerous tendency to flip over in curves.)


This vehicle is dumb even by 40k standards.

How many heavy, ranged weapons are used in close combat? The pilot is protected by power armour.

If you think something isn't realistic and thus have issues with it, you are in the wrong hobby.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. I don't appreciate the spamming of topics with constant crying and whinging. Some have made it clear they don't like it - good for them. Everyone who feels the same can move on.