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.

Has anyone heard if there will be any more of the weapon upgrade kits? Something like a Breacher kit with shields, lascutters, and graviton guns or a Despoiler kit with bolt pistols, swords, and axes. Also will there be jump packs with either single nozzle like the Blood Angels Sanguinary Guard or the older twin jet turbine style? With the jump packs and a Despoiler kit it would take care of Assault squads and Destroyers would need a few more pistols and some rad-missile launchers.

Smaug wrote:
Has anyone heard if there will be any more of the weapon upgrade kits? Something like a Breacher kit with shields, lascutters, and graviton guns or a Despoiler kit with bolt pistols, swords, and axes. Also will there be jump packs with either single nozzle like the Blood Angels Sanguinary Guard or the older twin jet turbine style? With the jump packs and a Despoiler kit it would take care of Assault squads and Destroyers would need a few more pistols and some rad-missile launchers.

We know there are more heavy weapons.

Assault marines and jump packs will be a new kit (unless they don't happen, which seems unlikely to me with the 'all-in' focus they're putting on HH). Jump packs are the harness, too, which gets modelled on the chest piece, and GW's very averse to 'tactical' legs and assault marines. More running or... sigh... jumping poses would be in the works.

if we get running assault marines be greatful, it means no fething flight stands

assault marines, breachers and destroyers are obviously coming, I am hoping they are not MKVI as I would rather the breachers be MKIII and the assault marines MKII but thats me.

Mk IV assault marines with the single turbine jump pack please.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Mk IV assault marines with the single turbine jump pack please.

Sanguinary guard style?

 GaroRobe wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Mk IV assault marines with the single turbine jump pack please.

Sanguinary guard style?

They could dual kit with destroyers

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
They could dual kit with destroyers

Or make you buy a separate accessory box.

It's cute that people still think there are going to be all inclusive boxes.

They've crossed into weapons boxes making people buy 2 boxes to make 1 unit rather than just putting the whole unit in 1 box.

Sure, sure... you had to buy X boxes to make an all one weapon unit before in 40k. However, instead of just putting X unit in 1 box, they've just put it in 2 boxes.

They had the chance to do the right thing, by the customer, and didn't.

They'd just have to add a weapon sprue to the box, increasing the sprue count and thereby the price (though as has been noted, the heavy sprue is quite sparse, and it seems even the special sprue has some unused space).

JWBS wrote:
They'd just have to add a weapon sprue to the box, increasing the sprue count and thereby the price (though as has been noted, the heavy sprue is quite sparse, and it seems even the special sprue has some unused space).

I'm talking more about what WILL be coming, like Assault Marines.

From what we've seen, I put my money on Assault Marines in one box with pistols and chainswords, maybe a Plasma Pistol and Power Fist.

Followed with a Jump Pack box and anything not in the "Assault Marines" box.

Kinda depends imo. JPs aren't exactly small when it comes to sprue allocation, which is why DC squads, for exaqmple, were 5 man with packs iirc. Obviously this suits some but for others (people who want 10 packless DC with a rhino) it's quite disastrous.

JWBS wrote:
Kinda depends imo. JPs aren't exactly small when it comes to sprue allocation, which is why DC squads, for exaqmple, were 5 man with packs iirc. Obviously this suits some but for others (people who want 10 packless DC with a rhino) it's quite disastrous.

One sprue could possibly fit 5 jump packs, 5 sets of bolt pistol chain sword arms, and one set of sergeant pistols and melee options.

I'd prefer a good ol fashioned jetpack sprue...so you could add one to any model you chose

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
One sprue could possibly fit 5 jump packs, 5 sets of bolt pistol chain sword arms, and one set of sergeant pistols and melee options.

And then 4 of those sprues per box.

I presume the 20-man squads was also a thing for Assault Squads, yes?

 kodos wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'm far from a GW supporter but even I think this discussion is getting a bit silly.

Maybe, but I have said it already, for a premium priced model kit, I expect a premium product, and not something I need to cut them a litte to make it fit

But someone else might say for a premium priced model kit they want something that looks good, and IMO the new hand arrangement looks better than the old one.

If we're talking about "for a premium priced model kit" arguments... I still find the split shoulder pad more egregious. Or the fact you have to buy a separate weapons kit at all, for that price they couldn't just throw a special weapons sprue into the troops box.

 TalonZahn wrote:
It's cute that people still think there are going to be all inclusive boxes.

They've crossed into weapons boxes making people buy 2 boxes to make 1 unit rather than just putting the whole unit in 1 box.

Sure, sure... you had to buy X boxes to make an all one weapon unit before in 40k. However, instead of just putting X unit in 1 box, they've just put it in 2 boxes.

They had the chance to do the right thing, by the customer, and didn't.

Uh, we had to buy the weapons seperate before this too for HH. I really don't get where you're inventing a problem out of this from.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Uh, we had to buy the weapons seperate before this too for HH. I really don't get where you're inventing a problem out of this from.

Exactly, it was (and still is) a HH problem via FW.

Now it's the new standard via GW going forward.

I'm saying it's going to extend further into other units (the actual topic) like the Assault Marines probably no longer coming with jump packs.

If you think it stops with HH, well make sure to tag this.

 TalonZahn wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Uh, we had to buy the weapons seperate before this too for HH. I really don't get where you're inventing a problem out of this from.

Exactly, it was (and still is) a HH problem via FW.

Now it's the new standard via GW going forward.

I'm saying it's going to extend further into other units (the actual topic) like the Assault Marines probably no longer coming with jump packs.

If you think it stops with HH, well make sure to tag this.

At the end of the day it's a price problem and not a separating parts into different sets problem. I don't really care how many boxes or packs I have to buy, I care about the price at the bottom of the invoice.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 kodos wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'm far from a GW supporter but even I think this discussion is getting a bit silly.

Maybe, but I have said it already, for a premium priced model kit, I expect a premium product, and not something I need to cut them a litte to make it fit

But someone else might say for a premium priced model kit they want something that looks good, and IMO the new hand arrangement looks better than the old one.

If we're talking about "for a premium priced model kit" arguments... I still find the split shoulder pad more egregious. Or the fact you have to buy a separate weapons kit at all, for that price they couldn't just throw a special weapons sprue into the troops box.

the split shoulder pads are because they need to look good, the the line between will look worse than than not 100% round casted bolts, is only a problem if you don't take the time to assembly

which is another problem, it is a premium product for people who want tokes to game, so there will be not many who take the time and afford to make them look as good as they could be (so the whole think about paying more to get something that looks better falls apart with bad assemblied, too much primer used, quick painted models)

and yes, for that price and the reason that it only fits MkVI the weapon sprues should be in the box and not stand alone
being cheaper and/or fitting other armour would be a good reason not doing it, but in this case there is no good argument to do it

Is it a new standard, or is it just GW trying to make sprues stretch farther to cover more units? The weapons aren't compatible with the older Mk III or Mk IV kits, but could easily fit a new Mk V or II kit. The rhino looks carefully designed to reuse most of the hull and hatch sprue for a vindicator, whirlwind, or predator. The spartan sprues are designed to swap out a single sprue to build a land raider proteus instead. The sponson sprue from the kratos clearly will be reused for both the sicaran and a predator kit.

HH tactical squads dont come with special or heavy weapons normally. Support and devastator squads are all equipped with the same weapons, unlike the mixes of 40k. It makes sense for hh to split the weapons sprues out. There's no point to make a sprue of 10 guard plasma guns, flamers, and grenade launchers if a guard squad can only take 1 or 2 per squad, while units like fire dragons are only armed with their fusion guns and dont have other options.

The closest would be the upgrade sprues for necromunda or kill team, but they are to customize individual models more than just split out a set of weapon options entirely.

When it comes into effect for Primaris kits from Marines 2.0, then we'll know.

 kodos wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 kodos wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'm far from a GW supporter but even I think this discussion is getting a bit silly.

Maybe, but I have said it already, for a premium priced model kit, I expect a premium product, and not something I need to cut them a litte to make it fit

But someone else might say for a premium priced model kit they want something that looks good, and IMO the new hand arrangement looks better than the old one.

If we're talking about "for a premium priced model kit" arguments... I still find the split shoulder pad more egregious. Or the fact you have to buy a separate weapons kit at all, for that price they couldn't just throw a special weapons sprue into the troops box.

the split shoulder pads are because they need to look good, the the line between will look worse than than not 100% round casted bolts, is only a problem if you don't take the time to assembly

which is another problem, it is a premium product for people who want tokes to game, so there will be not many who take the time and afford to make them look as good as they could be (so the whole think about paying more to get something that looks better falls apart with bad assemblied, too much primer used, quick painted models)

and yes, for that price and the reason that it only fits MkVI the weapon sprues should be in the box and not stand alone
being cheaper and/or fitting other armour would be a good reason not doing it, but in this case there is no good argument to do it

There are options (that would be more complicated to design) that would eliminate the seam while maintaining the rivet shape.

But I think it's a similar sort of argument...

The shoulder pads are annoying and I'd expect better on a premium priced kit... but with a bit of extra time during assembly it can be fixed.

The guns not fitting older kits is annoying and I'd expect better on a premium priced kit... but with a bit of extra time during assembly it can be fixed.

I've never played a game of HH to know how many special weapons you're likely to have vs bolter marines, but to me its six in one half a dozen in the other, either to fix 40 shoulder pads vs adapting 10 special weapons, neither being something I particularly want to do.

I think for the most part I've talked myself out of buying into HH for now, perhaps I'll read some reviews or watch some games once it gets out into the broader community and decide whether to pick it up in a few months when (if?) it restocks.

this is simply to save on machine time and mould cost

we have seen similar in the past, with certain sprues being re-used for several kits in 40k as well (the time when the different Space Wolves units were simply "naked" tactical marines sprues with an upgrade and melee weapon sprue added)
and it also makes no real sense in 40k that you need to buy a Devastor Box to get the 1 heavy weapon you want in your Tactical Squad but having a basic Marine Box and buy the weapons/upgrades you need

I don't think anyone has a problem with GW selling weapon sprues - it's been something that I've seen calls for for years and years.

What I don't think we were expecting was GW to charge more for them than a whole squad cost a few years back.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't think anyone has a problem with GW selling weapon sprues - it's been something that I've seen calls for for years and years.

What I don't think we were expecting was GW to charge more for them than a whole squad cost a few years back.

Only due to the scale. Back in the day you could could buy 5 packs of metal plasma guns for $10.95 from GW, or $2.19 each. The special weapon box is 60 weapons for $42, or $0.70 per gun. Trade off of buying bulk and a fixed variety, but each gun is a lot cheaper.

With all this talk of possible other plastics I am tempted to delay my army building until more is known. My 40k main are White Scars but whether I build them for 30k will depend entirely on the existance of plastic jetbikes. Otherwise I'm probably going Alpha Legion.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

There are options (that would be more complicated to design) that would eliminate the seam while maintaining the rivet shape.

I don't think that's true. I'm scribbling in my notebooks here, and I don't think it's possible to cast the complete pad in a two piece mold, in any orientation. You could do it for a single shoulder pad at a time with a slide mold with 3+ mold elements, but I'm dubious whether it could work for multiple at once given the orientations of the moving parts. And you'd still be left with a mold line on the visible surface of the shoulder pad, roughly where the seam is going to be on the two-piece shoulders.

Now, in a larger scale you could do some things to get around this, such as adding the studs separately, as it might be possible to cast indentations for locating them without running into problems with undercuts.

In the end, GW could have avoided this by altering the stud pattern, with perhaps only one or two lines going down the middle, that could have been feasible to cast. Personally I would have preferred this option, or even having the Mk6's trademark rimless shoulder pads on both sides.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

There are options (that would be more complicated to design) that would eliminate the seam while maintaining the rivet shape.

I don't think that's true. I'm scribbling in my notebooks here, and I don't think it's possible to cast the complete pad in a two piece mold, in any orientation. You could do it for a single shoulder pad at a time with a slide mold with 3+ mold elements, but I'm dubious whether it could work for multiple at once given the orientations of the moving parts. And you'd still be left with a mold line on the visible surface of the shoulder pad, roughly where the seam is going to be on the two-piece shoulders.

Now, in a larger scale you could do some things to get around this, such as adding the studs separately, as it might be possible to cast indentations for locating them without running into problems with undercuts.

In the end, GW could have avoided this by altering the stud pattern, with perhaps only one or two lines going down the middle, that could have been feasible to cast. Personally I would have preferred this option, or even having the Mk6's trademark rimless shoulder pads on both sides.

I'm not that familiar with slide moulding, GW did use a slide mould for the Baneblade in a way that didn't need them to be cast one at a time, but I don't really know how that was done. I've seen some Tamiya and Bandai models that make me think "how the hell did they do that" because I can't picture the slide process.

But that's just one option. I think the shoulder pads are large enough that you could do it in 3 pieces. The shoulder pad itself could be cast as a single piece with only the central most studs cast in place and holes for the front/back studs. Then the front studs are grouped together on a frame that slots in from the back, and the same for the back studs. I'd have to sketch it up in CAD to be sure, but I think it'd work so long as the pad is thick enough to have a cut out on the back, which I think it probably is.

It would require more assembly, but it'd be a quick assembly with minimal clean up required afterwards.

Another option which I know would alter the aesthetics is just to have an intentional panel line there, so it doesn't matter that there's a seam because it's on a panel line (the seam could go back and forth around the central row of studs in such a way that it looks like those studs are holding the front and back of the shoulder pad together).

Third option is just have them in resin But GW likes to pretend resin is some exotic material priced as if it were a precious metal even though their casting quality is some of the worse around.

Just tried an original RTB01 beaky head on a Primaris body and it didn't fit at all.

This is rampant profiteering from GW and we can't let them get away with it.