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:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s a helluva price if it’s true. Seems it’s from a reliable source who Valrak says is yet to be wrong.

I mean, it’s still a big old chunk of cash. Of course it is. But I’m going to stick my neck out and say for anyone looking to get into Horus Heresy, it’s pretty damned close to Ojectively Good Value.

Hell. Two of those and a judicious selection of the weapon packs, and you’ve a really solid (if admittedly unvaried) core force to pad out with tastier tidbits.

More so if online discounters can get you 20-25% off.

by GW standards its not bad, still feels a little padded with the big tank. 2 rhino's and a 2nd dreadnought would have been better

although it'll be a festival of plenty on ebay for the big tank

it'll depend on how good the tank is on table top I suppose. we'll have to see if HH 2.0 manages to make land raiders decent.

1.5 had good land raiders as they were cheap, 180pts with no twin heavy bolter and no assault ramp, it did its job and for 20pts more it got another lascannon (might be misrembering the costs), 180pts made it semi spamable which is why my Iron Wing was built around a squadron of 3 with command tank.

if the leaks are correct its now 220 standard with a twin heavy bolter, 5HP and 12 transport capacity, but each additional land raider is 205, thats seems pretty good to me and best of all, its now an assault vehicle built in so worth the extra cost up front and overall points drop for the unit, looking forward to seeing if this stays the same on drop

So, based on the tie in book it looks like the box set isn't the Siege of Terra exactly, but the Siege of Cthonia which is apparently 12-14.M31 which puts it around Late-Heresy according to the timeline:

So it's supposed to represent Imperial Fists vs Thousand Sons?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
So it's supposed to represent Imperial Fists vs Thousand Sons?

Where'd you get that from? Cthonia was the home world of the Sons of Horus.

That's what it looked like on the cover. I can clearly make out the imperial fist icon and it looked to me like the other symbol was Egyptian based. I forgot about the fact that the Black Legion was originally the Sons of Horus.

??Thats just a stylized eye symbol used by Horus and co, the "eye of Horus" if you will - which I don't think is particularly egyptian styled aesthetically, though the name is definitely a nod in that direction.

But also clearly not Thousand Sons there, Alpha Legion would have been a better guess. At this point in timeline the Thousand Sons are still red bois.

Also, I think so much for the "Heta-Gladius" rumors, since it seems the new box has no such name.

 Crimson wrote:
In any case, the armours can be customised even in the lore and often are, so it would be silly for anyone to give you hard time for doing so.
Though given some of the attitudes I've seen here, not totally inconceivable...

Are there any specific armour configurations/combinations that we know don't work? I know Mk.VI helmets don't work with Mk.VIII torsos, but that's not really relevant to the Horus Heresy.

Are there any other marks of Power Armour that are more 'set' or don't take well to mix'n'matching?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
So, based on the tie in book it looks like the box set isn't the Siege of Terra exactly, but the Siege of Cthonia which is apparently 12-14.M31 which puts it around Late-Heresy according to the timeline:

That would explain why all the Marines are product placement for the new boxed set have Mk.VI armour. Good to see they thought about that at least.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In any case, the armours can be customised even in the lore and often are, so it would be silly for anyone to give you hard time for doing so.
Though given some of the attitudes I've seen here, not totally inconceivable...

Are there any specific armour configurations/combinations that we know don't work? I know Mk.VI helmets don't work with Mk.VIII torsos, but that's not really relevant to the Horus Heresy.

Are there any other marks of Power Armour that are more 'set' or don't take well to mix'n'matching?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
So, based on the tie in book it looks like the box set isn't the Siege of Terra exactly, but the Siege of Cthonia which is apparently 12-14.M31 which puts it around Late-Heresy according to the timeline:

That would explain why all the Marines are product placement for the new boxed set have Mk.VI armour. Good to see they thought about that at least.

I mean it's not like MkVI hasn't been on the cover before:

Not really the point I was making, but ok...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In any case, the armours can be customised even in the lore and often are, so it would be silly for anyone to give you hard time for doing so.
Though given some of the attitudes I've seen here, not totally inconceivable...

Are there any specific armour configurations/combinations that we know don't work? I know Mk.VI helmets don't work with Mk.VIII torsos, but that's not really relevant to the Horus Heresy.

Are there any other marks of Power Armour that are more 'set' or don't take well to mix'n'matching?

Only 6 and 7 are plug-and-play with each other by design. The rest can be made to work together but require rebuilding the parts to match up, with varying degrees of difficulty. Matching a Mk2 part to a Mk3 suit should be quite easy, but Mk2 to Mk4 requires more work.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Are there any specific armour configurations/combinations that we know don't work? I know Mk.VI helmets don't work with Mk.VIII torsos, but that's not really relevant to the Horus Heresy.

Are there any other marks of Power Armour that are more 'set' or don't take well to mix'n'matching?

If we're talking about models and not lore, I can say that most are interchangeable, except the mark III heads can be quite large and sometimes do not fit well within the gorget of Mk. VIII, much like beakies. Also the Mk III legs and torsos can look a bit odd when paired with other marks, as they are substantially bulkier.

No One Important wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In any case, the armours can be customised even in the lore and often are, so it would be silly for anyone to give you hard time for doing so.
Though given some of the attitudes I've seen here, not totally inconceivable...

Are there any specific armour configurations/combinations that we know don't work? I know Mk.VI helmets don't work with Mk.VIII torsos, but that's not really relevant to the Horus Heresy.

Are there any other marks of Power Armour that are more 'set' or don't take well to mix'n'matching?

Only 6 and 7 are plug-and-play with each other by design. The rest can be made to work together but require rebuilding the parts to match up, with varying degrees of difficulty. Matching a Mk2 part to a Mk3 suit should be quite easy, but Mk2 to Mk4 requires more work.

Mark IV should be the most problematic, since its a significant change and technological refit very different from the previous armors (and mkV).

Mark V should be fairly flexible since its basically a field refit by techmarines and already uses existing parts, including the crappier power cables. (I also really want a MkV kit)

reminds me how "concentrated" are armor types. is a force that uses mixed mk VI IV and III marks of armor (like 1 squad mk vi, 1 squad mk 3 etc) something that was seen, or did most legions employ armor universally across companies etc?

BrianDavion wrote:
reminds me how "concentrated" are armor types. is a force that uses mixed mk VI IV and III marks of armor (like 1 squad mk vi, 1 squad mk 3 etc) something that was seen, or did most legions employ armor universally across companies etc?

Generally speaking Legions would favor marks that paired well to their fighting style, but at the same time if the Mechanicum sends you a shipment of something else you aren't exactly going to turn it down either because armor would need replacing, new recruits need equipping, ect.

Officially no formation would be 100% anything (even squads could see some mixing) but we're also looking at a tiny sliver of a massive legion so don't let it stop you from doing all of a single mark if you want.

good means if I wanna mix some mk IV and MK III in with those new MK VIs I don't need to worry.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s a helluva price if it’s true. Seems it’s from a reliable source who Valrak says is yet to be wrong.

I mean, it’s still a big old chunk of cash. Of course it is. But I’m going to stick my neck out and say for anyone looking to get into Horus Heresy, it’s pretty damned close to Ojectively Good Value.

Hell. Two of those and a judicious selection of the weapon packs, and you’ve a really solid (if admittedly unvaried) core force to pad out with tastier tidbits.

More so if online discounters can get you 20-25% off.

by GW standards its not bad, still feels a little padded with the big tank. 2 rhino's and a 2nd dreadnought would have been better

although it'll be a festival of plenty on ebay for the big tank

it'll depend on how good the tank is on table top I suppose. we'll have to see if HH 2.0 manages to make land raiders decent.

It’s a Spartan, not a Land Raider. I think Spartans have always been pretty good in 30k.

 ImAGeek wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s a helluva price if it’s true. Seems it’s from a reliable source who Valrak says is yet to be wrong.

I mean, it’s still a big old chunk of cash. Of course it is. But I’m going to stick my neck out and say for anyone looking to get into Horus Heresy, it’s pretty damned close to Ojectively Good Value.

Hell. Two of those and a judicious selection of the weapon packs, and you’ve a really solid (if admittedly unvaried) core force to pad out with tastier tidbits.

More so if online discounters can get you 20-25% off.

by GW standards its not bad, still feels a little padded with the big tank. 2 rhino's and a 2nd dreadnought would have been better

although it'll be a festival of plenty on ebay for the big tank

it'll depend on how good the tank is on table top I suppose. we'll have to see if HH 2.0 manages to make land raiders decent.

It’s a Spartan, not a Land Raider. I think Spartans have always been pretty good in 30k.

well I said land raiders as more the class of heavily armored transports

Honestly mixing armour looks cool, and can break up the sameness of the squads. When I was putting together my Deathwatch army - long before they ever got a Codex, mind you - I went out of my way to source Marine helmets from all sorts of places to add lots of variety to each squad.

 brushcommando wrote:
If we're talking about models and not lore, I can say that most are interchangeable, except the mark III heads can be quite large and sometimes do not fit well within the gorget of Mk. VIII, much like beakies. Also the Mk III legs and torsos can look a bit odd when paired with other marks, as they are substantially bulkier.

I was talking fluff more than miniatures, but thanks for the note on the Mk.III heads. I'll keep that in mind.

 Crimson wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Specifically, one thing I'm thinking of doing is keeping the beakie armour but removing the actual beakie heads and replacing it with something custom like this...

And then swapping out the studded shoulder pad for something like a Mk3 shoulder pad.

But, but, the beakie helm and the studded shoulder are the best parts... (T⌓T)

In any case, the armours can be customised even in the lore and often are, so it would be silly for anyone to give you hard time for doing so.
Though given some of the attitudes I've seen here, not totally inconceivable...

Thanks for the comments from everyone, so it seems making some custom bits and mixing armour marks won't run me afoul of any insane HH fans.

I just hear the comments about HH fans being a bit like historical fans, and as a historical fan myself I'd scrunch my nose up if someone decided to make a custom Panzer IV turret because they didn't like the look of the actual one, or swap late war equipment on to early war models, etc etc. I'm a rivet counter when it comes to historics, but a dreamer when it comes to everything else, lol.

There are HH rivet counters. Would be gatekeepers who talk about analogies to historical wargaming. The kind of obnoxious types who say HH is “40K for grownups”. All that stuff about correct armour for certain legions is entirely in their own imaginations though and those people are best avoided.

GW have repeatedly said that all marks from II to VI were in use to some degree throughout the Heresy and you can use whatever you like.

Every single Heresy fan I’ve ever come across has been a genuinely great person and, if there is a distinction to be made between the typical Heresy player and the typical 40K player, it’s that the Heresy guys are more likely to be into narrative gaming and less competitive (in my experience).

No One Important wrote:
Only 6 and 7 are plug-and-play with each other by design. The rest can be made to work together but require rebuilding the parts to match up, with varying degrees of difficulty. Matching a Mk2 part to a Mk3 suit should be quite easy, but Mk2 to Mk4 requires more work.

nope...4 to 7 are "plug and play".

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Are there any specific armour configurations/combinations that we know don't work?

Are there any other marks of Power Armour that are more 'set' or don't take well to mix'n'matching?

Based on the Armour Artikel from WD #469;

Group A - based on 2
2+3

Group B - based on 4
4+5+6+7

Armours from each group are compatible with each other without issues. When you want to mix armours from Group A and Group B the Techmarines need some improvisations and have limitations.

the problem with the historical comparison (and sane rational people understand this) is the heresy is a work of fiction, that hasn't been EXHUASTIVLY documented.

I can, if I'm of a mind go out and find the EXACT order of battle for a given Military unit on April 17th 1943, this may be difficult in some cases (Soviet records may be tricky to get, and german records may have been destroyed during the fall of Berlin etc) but in theory that info's out there.

that info isn't avaliable for the Heresy

BrianDavion wrote:
that info isn't avaliable for the Heresy

it is available the same way as you have the order of battle for a lot of historical battles available

most historical battles are simply covered by A VS B with the amount of soldiers in total as a bonus

this is a reason why for example the American Civil war as a popular setting even outside the US, because there are very detailed documentations available in English (and why Napoleonic wars focus on Waterloo and Spain, not just because GB won, but information are available in English, and there is more English literature available for Waterloo than 1806-1815 combined)

also for the Heresy, there are some battles with a lot of details available, while for others you just have a timeframe and which factions were there
which is enough to re-create the "historical" setting

 kodos wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
that info isn't avaliable for the Heresy

it is available the same way as you have the order of battle for a lot of historical battles available

most historical battles are simply covered by A VS B with the amount of soldiers in total as a bonus

this is a reason why for example the American Civil war as a popular setting even outside the US, because there are very detailed documentations available in English (and why Napoleonic wars focus on Waterloo and Spain, not just because GB won, but information are available in English, and there is more English literature available for Waterloo than 1806-1815 combined)

also for the Heresy, there are some battles with a lot of details available, while for others you just have a timeframe and which factions were there
which is enough to re-create the "historical" setting

Wrong! there are numerous battles in the heresy WITHOUT records. or whose records amount to "word bearers fought ultramarines here, ultramarines won" Maybe you'll get a commander name and unit designation. but there's no info beyond that.

you're certainly not going to find that suddenly there's an ENTIRELY NEW TYPE OF TANK that we never heard of until now that made up a large amount of ww2 armor forces.

BrianDavion wrote:

Wrong! there are numerous battles in the heresy WITHOUT records. or whose records amount to "word bearers fought ultramarines here, ultramarines won" Maybe you'll get a commander name and unit designation. but there's no info beyond that.

So the very same information you get for 99% of battles in history, making every historical wargame a fictional game unless it covers that 1% were more information is available

BrianDavion wrote:
you're certainly not going to find that suddenly there's an ENTIRELY NEW TYPE OF TANK that we never heard of until now that made up a large amount of ww2 armor forces.

In 2009 we found an entirely new class of chariot from the Chinese warring states period and that's four times younger than the HH in relation to its own "present".

Just saying.

 kodos wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Wrong! there are numerous battles in the heresy WITHOUT records. or whose records amount to "word bearers fought ultramarines here, ultramarines won" Maybe you'll get a commander name and unit designation. but there's no info beyond that.

So the very same information you get for 99% of battles in history, making every historical wargame a fictional game unless it covers that 1% were more information is available

Risible post.

I do love that in the latest WHC post they stated there’s no such thing as incorrect armour marks for a Legion. Well played, GW. Well played.

Here are the Night Lords




Well, it appears the techniques used are different across presenters. Not as strong as the previous two by Peaches (if that's his handle?) but I do find a lot of the Warhammer teams painters presentations a bit odd.

RazorEdge wrote:

No One Important wrote:
Only 6 and 7 are plug-and-play with each other by design. The rest can be made to work together but require rebuilding the parts to match up, with varying degrees of difficulty. Matching a Mk2 part to a Mk3 suit should be quite easy, but Mk2 to Mk4 requires more work.

nope...4 to 7 are "plug and play".

Provably wrong. The dual technology circuits were first introduced in Mk6 armor.

 zedmeister wrote:
Here are the Night Lords

Spoiler:

Well, it appears the techniques used are different across presenters. Not as strong as the previous two by Peaches (if that's his handle?) but I do find a lot of the Warhammer teams painters presentations a bit odd.

I like that one more than the previous ones they've done.

An interesting outcome of watching the awful GW HH painting tutorials is I've started to get recommendations from lesser known youtubers for some interesting SM painting techniques.