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.
Rippy wrote: I miss the days of Grimdark, everything is bad for everyone, rather than the "Super Marine Avengers Are Here To Win Again" in just about every narrative.
Yes I get that having them as the good guy hero bois probably sells GW more models to kids.
This new arc reminds me the most of how in the first 5 minutes of the new star wars movie theyre all "woah-oh these aint your daddys storm troopers! Theyre the super badass trained from birth ultra elite bad dudes who would never lose a battle to some plucky teddy bears setting home alone traps!"
And then it was right back to star wars having theleast threatening bad guys pretty much in cinematic history minutes later, unable to hit anything or fight anyone in any context.
Thats what the whole setup to 8th ed feels like now. The imperium has never felt safer or more secure in their dominance. Marines have never felt more invincible.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
I miss the old White Dwarf battle reports of 3rd and 4th Ed., when players brought competitive lists while still showcasing the latest models. Players would explain their plan and then discuss what went right or wrong during the game, at a time when actual tactics gave each player greater agency. The last time I read a battle report it was just formulaic dreck that over-dramatized the scenario with little if any input from the players.
mrFickle wrote: I miss all the funny dice, d3 through to d20. I don’t know why but when I was a kid I thought it was cool
So.... You're missing the wrong game.
2nd ed used at least d8 and d10 for armor penetration roles. d12 and d4 too iirc.
I had a 20 year hiatus from 40k not sure if I played 2ed or 3ed but jumped up to 8ed last year. Can’t remember exactly what dice were used but I swear there was a d20 involved. I still have old codexes I may have a look
A Powerfist was 8+D6+D20 for Armor penetration
Chainfist was 10+D4+D6+D20 A Multimelta was 8+D6+2D12, plus a 4" diameter blast marker, which meant it hit multiple locations on a vehicle. Lascannon 3D6+9
Krak Missile D6+D10+8
Assault Cannon D6+D10+8 for each shot that hit, which was up to 9 if you got real lucky.
I feel vindicated ROFL. Anyway I think there was more tension when a dice role could be between 1 and 20. I’ll tell you what I don’t miss, terminators save was 2+ on 2 d6 I think
Whether or not the Lascannon is a powerful gun depends quite a bit on the edition. I don't clearly recall, but I think a Vanquisher Cannon would still be hard pressed to out-perform four Lascannons in most of them.
Although maybe this depends on your idea of a powerful gun.
S8 AP2 Armorbane should outperform S9 AP2 not-armorbane in most editions. A S9 lascannon has a 17% chance of a penetration, a S8 Armorbane Vanquisher has a 59% chance of getting a pen. On the VDT they're the same. It takes about... 4 Lascannons [3.5] to equal a Vanquisher gun's odds.
Which is why the Vanquisher gun is a actual powerful tank gun, and the predator annihilator is comparable to like an ontos with 6 recoilless rifles to get the job done.
I mean, if the effect winds up being the same* anyways I don't see why not to call the thing a "legit tank". I think I often prefer the exotic nature of a bunch of lasers and/or the idiosyncratic format of the Land Raider.
The "exotic-future-weapon" especially extends to the Multimelta, which is man-portable and also hits as hard as the Vanquisher (Melta vs. Armorbane in the 6th-7th ed example). Actually a bit harder because of the AP1. Obviously there's the range difference, but you get that sweet, sweet 1950's heat-ray imagery.
*Unless the Vanquisher has changed since the Index (I only have the IG in index), the four Lascannons currently far, far outshine it.
In the 6th-7th Paradigm four Lascannons I think wind up faring much better against lighter armor, vs. the Vanquisher. You get multiple hits for multiple damage effect rolls. Then again, twin-linking reduces the number of rolls to Pen. Lots of factors involved.
That's what I miss most. When killing tanks meant getting a big antitank gun that was supposed to make a big hole in armor.
Because tanks don't have multiple-mounted tank guns, usually, and the attempts to mount multiple tank guns were swiftly discontinued because they contributed nothing but reduced working space in the tank. That's not how tanks die. They don't have hit points, they have armor protecting squishy people, explosive munitions, and flammable engines and fuel. To kill a tank you need to have a big gun that can breach the armor so that it can destroy one of those things inside the tank that makes it work. Basically, if the gun in question can penetrate the tank, it will kill it in very swift order. If it can't, it probably won't without a very lucky hit. And I miss the days when that was the case. A big AT gun killed a tank, and little guns were mostly harmless, needed to get lucky, and generally of more value against light targets.
Anyway, this is what I see the Predator as:
Spoiler:
It's basically exactly what the Predator is [it even looks like one and has basically the same loadout!]. The lascannon predator would be taking that thing, and mounting a bunch of recoilless rifles to it like an Ontos. Which technically works through the principle that one of them will hit and get lucky, but isn't as good as a full sized tank gun.
Anyway, I miss the days when tanks were tanks.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/02/13 00:47:02
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
I miss the days of no flyers, no super heavies, named characters by consent and having to follow the org chart. Back when armies looked more like congruous armies. Back before someone at GW got possessed by a Slaaneshi daemon and introduced all of the excess the game has now.
Whether or not the Lascannon is a powerful gun depends quite a bit on the edition. I don't clearly recall, but I think a Vanquisher Cannon would still be hard pressed to out-perform four Lascannons in most of them.
Although maybe this depends on your idea of a powerful gun.
S8 AP2 Armorbane should outperform S9 AP2 not-armorbane in most editions. A S9 lascannon has a 17% chance of a penetration, a S8 Armorbane Vanquisher has a 59% chance of getting a pen. On the VDT they're the same. It takes about... 4 Lascannons [3.5] to equal a Vanquisher gun's odds.
Which is why the Vanquisher gun is a actual powerful tank gun, and the predator annihilator is comparable to like an ontos with 6 recoilless rifles to get the job done.
I mean, if the effect winds up being the same* anyways I don't see why not to call the thing a "legit tank". I think I often prefer the exotic nature of a bunch of lasers and/or the idiosyncratic format of the Land Raider.
The "exotic-future-weapon" especially extends to the Multimelta, which is man-portable and also hits as hard as the Vanquisher (Melta vs. Armorbane in the 6th-7th ed example). Actually a bit harder because of the AP1. Obviously there's the range difference, but you get that sweet, sweet 1950's heat-ray imagery.
*Unless the Vanquisher has changed since the Index (I only have the IG in index), the four Lascannons currently far, far outshine it.
In the 6th-7th Paradigm four Lascannons I think wind up faring much better against lighter armor, vs. the Vanquisher. You get multiple hits for multiple damage effect rolls. Then again, twin-linking reduces the number of rolls to Pen. Lots of factors involved.
That's what I miss most. When killing tanks meant getting a big antitank gun that was supposed to make a big hole in armor.
Because tanks don't have multiple-mounted tank guns, usually, and the attempts to mount multiple tank guns were swiftly discontinued because they contributed nothing but reduced working space in the tank. That's not how tanks die. They don't have hit points, they have armor protecting squishy people, explosive munitions, and flammable engines and fuel. To kill a tank you need to have a big gun that can breach the armor so that it can destroy one of those things inside the tank that makes it work. Basically, if the gun in question can penetrate the tank, it will kill it in very swift order. If it can't, it probably won't without a very lucky hit. And I miss the days when that was the case. A big AT gun killed a tank, and little guns were mostly harmless, needed to get lucky, and generally of more value against light targets.
Anyway, this is what I see the Predator as:
It's basically exactly what the Predator is [it even looks like one and has basically the same loadout!]. The lascannon predator would be taking that thing, and mounting a bunch of recoilless rifles to it like an Ontos. Which technically works through the principle that one of them will hit and get lucky, but isn't as good as a full sized tank gun.
Anyway, I miss the days when tanks were tanks.
Lol. The visual similarity of a Predator with that thing is shocking. Although the predator would be way bigger because 40k tanks are huge.
I totally get the desire for a single large AT cannon MBT. I do. I tend to think the twin-las is more or less equivalent. Las in particular because theoretically the beams could just focus on the same point and it really does just act like one larger weapon. I also just love my space lasers and the idea of ammunitionless guns for long deployment and deep penetration. Not to mention a Land Raider blowing away two vehicles at the same time as it barrels towards it's target to unload marines.
I too would prefer tank armor to be more all or nothing. The older damage effect paradigm was superior, and I dont like lasguns hurting my Land Raiders.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/13 02:32:04
Whether or not the Lascannon is a powerful gun depends quite a bit on the edition. I don't clearly recall, but I think a Vanquisher Cannon would still be hard pressed to out-perform four Lascannons in most of them.
Although maybe this depends on your idea of a powerful gun.
S8 AP2 Armorbane should outperform S9 AP2 not-armorbane in most editions. A S9 lascannon has a 17% chance of a penetration, a S8 Armorbane Vanquisher has a 59% chance of getting a pen. On the VDT they're the same. It takes about... 4 Lascannons [3.5] to equal a Vanquisher gun's odds.
Which is why the Vanquisher gun is a actual powerful tank gun, and the predator annihilator is comparable to like an ontos with 6 recoilless rifles to get the job done.
I mean, if the effect winds up being the same* anyways I don't see why not to call the thing a "legit tank". I think I often prefer the exotic nature of a bunch of lasers and/or the idiosyncratic format of the Land Raider.
The "exotic-future-weapon" especially extends to the Multimelta, which is man-portable and also hits as hard as the Vanquisher (Melta vs. Armorbane in the 6th-7th ed example). Actually a bit harder because of the AP1. Obviously there's the range difference, but you get that sweet, sweet 1950's heat-ray imagery.
*Unless the Vanquisher has changed since the Index (I only have the IG in index), the four Lascannons currently far, far outshine it.
In the 6th-7th Paradigm four Lascannons I think wind up faring much better against lighter armor, vs. the Vanquisher. You get multiple hits for multiple damage effect rolls. Then again, twin-linking reduces the number of rolls to Pen. Lots of factors involved.
That's what I miss most. When killing tanks meant getting a big antitank gun that was supposed to make a big hole in armor.
Because tanks don't have multiple-mounted tank guns, usually, and the attempts to mount multiple tank guns were swiftly discontinued because they contributed nothing but reduced working space in the tank. That's not how tanks die. They don't have hit points, they have armor protecting squishy people, explosive munitions, and flammable engines and fuel. To kill a tank you need to have a big gun that can breach the armor so that it can destroy one of those things inside the tank that makes it work. Basically, if the gun in question can penetrate the tank, it will kill it in very swift order. If it can't, it probably won't without a very lucky hit. And I miss the days when that was the case. A big AT gun killed a tank, and little guns were mostly harmless, needed to get lucky, and generally of more value against light targets.
Anyway, this is what I see the Predator as:
It's basically exactly what the Predator is [it even looks like one and has basically the same loadout!]. The lascannon predator would be taking that thing, and mounting a bunch of recoilless rifles to it like an Ontos. Which technically works through the principle that one of them will hit and get lucky, but isn't as good as a full sized tank gun.
Anyway, I miss the days when tanks were tanks.
Lol. The visual similarity of a Predator with that thing is shocking. Although the predator would be way bigger because 40k tanks are huge.
I totally get the desire for a single large AT cannon MBT. I do. I tend to think the twin-las is more or less equivalent. Las in particular because theoretically the beams could just focus on the same point and it really does just act like one larger weapon. I also just love my space lasers and the idea of ammunitionless guns for long deployment and deep penetration. Not to mention a Land Raider blowing away two vehicles at the same time as it barrels towards it's target to unload marines.
I too would prefer tank armor to be more all or nothing. The older damage effect paradigm was superior, and I dont like lasguns hurting my Land Raiders.
It is! The M113 Fire Support Vehicle is basically exactly a Predator, which is pretty funny. The turret even has the same shape! It just needs a pair of heavy bolter sponsons, and it'd be complete.
It's probably not a whole lot smaller though. A M113 vehicle is about 5m long, and a Rhino in 1:56 scale [28mm wargaming is approximately 1:56] comes in about 6.5m long. About %20 bigger in each direction, but it also carries people who are about 20% taller and presumably similarly scaled in other directions, so it needs to be a bit bigger to fit the space marines inside.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I miss a ton, too much to list. I miss everything I think from when I started. The games felt more important, the flow was more fun and even the bad things just lead to some real laughs.
Everything feels more clinical, aside from the names used for units which sound like someone tripping out made them.
Hell, I love my space wolves and even I can't stand the names being so over the top, took me years before i could stomach saying Murderfang with a straight face. I still think its one of the dumbest names I've ever heard.
s What's not to love about murdermurder the murdernaut with murderclaws and murderlust? \s murdermurdermurdermurderwolfwolfwolfwolfwolf
That said, I don't think a lot of the old names are really a whole lot less stupid. I mean "Devastator Squad", "Dominion Squad", and like all the aspect warrior names? There's more of them now, but like there were still a good share of silly names back in the day. And to some degree the names are nice, because "Heavy Weapons Squad" wouldn't be as exciting as "Devastator Squad".
Look at the Greater Daemon names (or just Daemon names generally) and they are some of the oldest ideas out there!
Daemon names in general are definitely pretty silly.
Bloodcrusher. What? Blood is a liquid, how do you even crush it?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/13 04:05:22
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
I see space marines in 40k as fast moving, tactical, special forces type troops. So that means fast fire support and troop carrier type vehicles. Their mbts would come from 30k when they were true armies. Those would be Sicarans and if you want to go really big fellblades.
As for something I miss from older editions: sweeping advance. (Fething 8th edition fall back rules).
I miss Kroot having 4+ cover saves in woods, being able to move through woods, and being able to shoot through woods no one else could. Kroot, kings of the forest.
Whether or not the Lascannon is a powerful gun depends quite a bit on the edition. I don't clearly recall, but I think a Vanquisher Cannon would still be hard pressed to out-perform four Lascannons in most of them.
Although maybe this depends on your idea of a powerful gun.
S8 AP2 Armorbane should outperform S9 AP2 not-armorbane in most editions. A S9 lascannon has a 17% chance of a penetration, a S8 Armorbane Vanquisher has a 59% chance of getting a pen. On the VDT they're the same. It takes about... 4 Lascannons [3.5] to equal a Vanquisher gun's odds.
Which is why the Vanquisher gun is a actual powerful tank gun, and the predator annihilator is comparable to like an ontos with 6 recoilless rifles to get the job done.
I mean, if the effect winds up being the same* anyways I don't see why not to call the thing a "legit tank". I think I often prefer the exotic nature of a bunch of lasers and/or the idiosyncratic format of the Land Raider.
The "exotic-future-weapon" especially extends to the Multimelta, which is man-portable and also hits as hard as the Vanquisher (Melta vs. Armorbane in the 6th-7th ed example). Actually a bit harder because of the AP1. Obviously there's the range difference, but you get that sweet, sweet 1950's heat-ray imagery.
*Unless the Vanquisher has changed since the Index (I only have the IG in index), the four Lascannons currently far, far outshine it.
In the 6th-7th Paradigm four Lascannons I think wind up faring much better against lighter armor, vs. the Vanquisher. You get multiple hits for multiple damage effect rolls. Then again, twin-linking reduces the number of rolls to Pen. Lots of factors involved.
That's what I miss most. When killing tanks meant getting a big antitank gun that was supposed to make a big hole in armor.
Because tanks don't have multiple-mounted tank guns, usually, and the attempts to mount multiple tank guns were swiftly discontinued because they contributed nothing but reduced working space in the tank. That's not how tanks die. They don't have hit points, they have armor protecting squishy people, explosive munitions, and flammable engines and fuel. To kill a tank you need to have a big gun that can breach the armor so that it can destroy one of those things inside the tank that makes it work. Basically, if the gun in question can penetrate the tank, it will kill it in very swift order. If it can't, it probably won't without a very lucky hit. And I miss the days when that was the case. A big AT gun killed a tank, and little guns were mostly harmless, needed to get lucky, and generally of more value against light targets.
Anyway, this is what I see the Predator as:
It's basically exactly what the Predator is [it even looks like one and has basically the same loadout!]. The lascannon predator would be taking that thing, and mounting a bunch of recoilless rifles to it like an Ontos. Which technically works through the principle that one of them will hit and get lucky, but isn't as good as a full sized tank gun.
Anyway, I miss the days when tanks were tanks.
Lol. The visual similarity of a Predator with that thing is shocking. Although the predator would be way bigger because 40k tanks are huge.
I totally get the desire for a single large AT cannon MBT. I do. I tend to think the twin-las is more or less equivalent. Las in particular because theoretically the beams could just focus on the same point and it really does just act like one larger weapon. I also just love my space lasers and the idea of ammunitionless guns for long deployment and deep penetration. Not to mention a Land Raider blowing away two vehicles at the same time as it barrels towards it's target to unload marines.
I too would prefer tank armor to be more all or nothing. The older damage effect paradigm was superior, and I dont like lasguns hurting my Land Raiders.
It is! The M113 Fire Support Vehicle is basically exactly a Predator, which is pretty funny. The turret even has the same shape! It just needs a pair of heavy bolter sponsons, and it'd be complete.
It's probably not a whole lot smaller though. A M113 vehicle is about 5m long, and a Rhino in 1:56 scale [28mm wargaming is approximately 1:56] comes in about 6.5m long. About %20 bigger in each direction, but it also carries people who are about 20% taller and presumably similarly scaled in other directions, so it needs to be a bit bigger to fit the space marines inside.
Measuring it out based on a 7 ft marine (from 7th ed tactical plastics) I get roughly 1m = 16.4mm, and THAT gets us here:
Just sayin. I get that the scale is fudged a bit for model presence, but even if we shrink the model and go by a 6.5m length (and they're already cramped for 10 marines inside), it's a damn big vehicle. And Land Raiders are huuuuge.
Whether or not the Lascannon is a powerful gun depends quite a bit on the edition. I don't clearly recall, but I think a Vanquisher Cannon would still be hard pressed to out-perform four Lascannons in most of them.
Although maybe this depends on your idea of a powerful gun.
S8 AP2 Armorbane should outperform S9 AP2 not-armorbane in most editions. A S9 lascannon has a 17% chance of a penetration, a S8 Armorbane Vanquisher has a 59% chance of getting a pen. On the VDT they're the same. It takes about... 4 Lascannons [3.5] to equal a Vanquisher gun's odds.
Which is why the Vanquisher gun is a actual powerful tank gun, and the predator annihilator is comparable to like an ontos with 6 recoilless rifles to get the job done.
I mean, if the effect winds up being the same* anyways I don't see why not to call the thing a "legit tank". I think I often prefer the exotic nature of a bunch of lasers and/or the idiosyncratic format of the Land Raider.
The "exotic-future-weapon" especially extends to the Multimelta, which is man-portable and also hits as hard as the Vanquisher (Melta vs. Armorbane in the 6th-7th ed example). Actually a bit harder because of the AP1. Obviously there's the range difference, but you get that sweet, sweet 1950's heat-ray imagery.
*Unless the Vanquisher has changed since the Index (I only have the IG in index), the four Lascannons currently far, far outshine it.
In the 6th-7th Paradigm four Lascannons I think wind up faring much better against lighter armor, vs. the Vanquisher. You get multiple hits for multiple damage effect rolls. Then again, twin-linking reduces the number of rolls to Pen. Lots of factors involved.
That's what I miss most. When killing tanks meant getting a big antitank gun that was supposed to make a big hole in armor.
Because tanks don't have multiple-mounted tank guns, usually, and the attempts to mount multiple tank guns were swiftly discontinued because they contributed nothing but reduced working space in the tank. That's not how tanks die. They don't have hit points, they have armor protecting squishy people, explosive munitions, and flammable engines and fuel. To kill a tank you need to have a big gun that can breach the armor so that it can destroy one of those things inside the tank that makes it work. Basically, if the gun in question can penetrate the tank, it will kill it in very swift order. If it can't, it probably won't without a very lucky hit. And I miss the days when that was the case. A big AT gun killed a tank, and little guns were mostly harmless, needed to get lucky, and generally of more value against light targets.
Anyway, this is what I see the Predator as:
It's basically exactly what the Predator is [it even looks like one and has basically the same loadout!]. The lascannon predator would be taking that thing, and mounting a bunch of recoilless rifles to it like an Ontos. Which technically works through the principle that one of them will hit and get lucky, but isn't as good as a full sized tank gun.
Anyway, I miss the days when tanks were tanks.
Lol. The visual similarity of a Predator with that thing is shocking. Although the predator would be way bigger because 40k tanks are huge.
I totally get the desire for a single large AT cannon MBT. I do. I tend to think the twin-las is more or less equivalent. Las in particular because theoretically the beams could just focus on the same point and it really does just act like one larger weapon. I also just love my space lasers and the idea of ammunitionless guns for long deployment and deep penetration. Not to mention a Land Raider blowing away two vehicles at the same time as it barrels towards it's target to unload marines.
I too would prefer tank armor to be more all or nothing. The older damage effect paradigm was superior, and I dont like lasguns hurting my Land Raiders.
It is! The M113 Fire Support Vehicle is basically exactly a Predator, which is pretty funny. The turret even has the same shape! It just needs a pair of heavy bolter sponsons, and it'd be complete.
It's probably not a whole lot smaller though. A M113 vehicle is about 5m long, and a Rhino in 1:56 scale [28mm wargaming is approximately 1:56] comes in about 6.5m long. About %20 bigger in each direction, but it also carries people who are about 20% taller and presumably similarly scaled in other directions, so it needs to be a bit bigger to fit the space marines inside.
Measuring it out based on a 7 ft marine (from 7th ed tactical plastics) I get roughly 1m = 16.4mm, and THAT gets us here:
Just sayin. I get that the scale is fudged a bit for model presence, but even if we shrink the model and go by a 6.5m length (and they're already cramped for 10 marines inside), it's a damn big vehicle. And Land Raiders are huuuuge.
Not denying that it's big, but it's scaled up by about the same amount that a person is scaled up to be a Space Marine.
As I said, 28mm Heroic is 1:56 scale miniatures, so a 11.5cm long Rhino [don't have one on me right now, source here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Scale_Model_Kits_for_40K] would be about 6.44m long, which is oversized to an M113 [4.86m long] by a similar scale factor [32%] that a space marine is oversized to a person [7'-7'6"/5'8 ~ 29%] .
I definitely imagine a Space Marine squad could fit inside a Rhino though. If a M113 can somehow fit 11 people in inside plus 2 crewmen, a Rhino can probably fit 10 marines inside it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/13 17:44:35
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
^The 1:56 scale isn't really consistent though. I measured conservatively for Space Marines and easily wound up with a 7.3m length tank.
For room, people "scrunch" a lot easier than Space Marines in armor. Them shoulder pads sure do get in the way of efficiently sitting side by side. It'd be interesting to 3d model marines (and rhinos) less stylistically exaggerated and see where that got you in terms of fit.
Insectum7 wrote: ^The 1:56 scale isn't really consistent though. I measured conservatively for Space Marines and easily wound up with a 7.3m length tank.
For room, people "scrunch" a lot easier than Space Marines in armor. Them shoulder pads sure do get in the way of efficiently sitting side by side. It'd be interesting to 3d model marines (and rhinos) less stylistically exaggerated and see where that got you in terms of fit.
It isn't quite consistent, but it's a baseline standard. After all, modern human models like SoS and SoB stand taller than old space marine models, and the oldmarines were basically as tall as a Cadian.
Shoulder Pads might present a problem, since the marines can't really pack in, but assuming you seat people in front of the side doors and have them arranged in three rows in the back of the Rhino, I think they might fit. Definitely not standing, but sitting down at least. It does have comically small seats inside of it. This seems like something to try to model, like how FW made all those strips that allow you to put 50 guys in a Gorgon or 12 in a Valkyrie.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/13 18:59:40
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
Insectum7 wrote: ^The 1:56 scale isn't really consistent though. I measured conservatively for Space Marines and easily wound up with a 7.3m length tank.
For room, people "scrunch" a lot easier than Space Marines in armor. Them shoulder pads sure do get in the way of efficiently sitting side by side. It'd be interesting to 3d model marines (and rhinos) less stylistically exaggerated and see where that got you in terms of fit.
It isn't quite consistent, but it's a baseline standard. After all, modern human models like SoS and SoB stand taller than old space marine models, and the oldmarines were basically as tall as a Cadian.
Imo the modern kits aren't really good to go by in this case, since the Rhino and Tactical kit were scaled back in. . . 1998ish? And at that time most human kits were smaller than the Cadian plastics which came out a little later. Metal Sisters, for example.
A good question might be: Which era of GW is actually 1:56?
Insectum7 wrote: ^The 1:56 scale isn't really consistent though. I measured conservatively for Space Marines and easily wound up with a 7.3m length tank.
For room, people "scrunch" a lot easier than Space Marines in armor. Them shoulder pads sure do get in the way of efficiently sitting side by side. It'd be interesting to 3d model marines (and rhinos) less stylistically exaggerated and see where that got you in terms of fit.
It isn't quite consistent, but it's a baseline standard. After all, modern human models like SoS and SoB stand taller than old space marine models, and the oldmarines were basically as tall as a Cadian.
Imo the modern kits aren't really good to go by in this case, since the Rhino and Tactical kit were scaled back in. . . 1998ish? And at that time most human kits were smaller than the Cadian plastics which came out a little later. Metal Sisters, for example.
A good question might be: Which era of GW is actually 1:56?
I don't actually know. I just know that the official number for 28mm wargaming is 1:56 scale. GW probably doesn't think too hard about scale, and just makes it as big as other kits.
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
amanita wrote: The guy who designed most of the early GW vehicles said the scale was 1:43, like lots of die cast metal models. Seems about right to me.
Interesting, that puts the 11.5cm long Rhino at 4.9m, but makes space marines tiny as hell [like 4 ft tall dwarfs]
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/02/13 19:45:04
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
Right. The Rhino might be scaled big to look impressive, but you still can't squeeze a marine through the hatch. It's all goofy. Which is why putting GW models next to actual scale models looks off.
They look great on the table though, so job well done imo.
Sixth Edition. Moral that actually worked properly and didn't gave people just vanishing off the board, the 90's in general but more specifically, how GW actually cared (or seemed to care) about its customers, Templates, vehicle facings and vehicle damage that didn't make them ridiculously OP.
But, most of all, more than anything else, the 3rd Edition Deamon hunters codex.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/13 23:58:16
The only thing better than a good nights sleep, is two good nights sleep.
Nibbler wrote: I can't remeber witch ed it was, but there was a time, when choosing to play a biel-tan cwe army meant, that I can bring aspect warriors as troops...
It felt right that way.
There were multiple times like that , were your HQ choice had actual influence on your army composition.
F.E. A nurgle CSM lord allowed you plague marines as troops.
some of the stuff was allbeit preety ridicoulus.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Nibbler wrote: I can't remeber witch ed it was, but there was a time, when choosing to play a biel-tan cwe army meant, that I can bring aspect warriors as troops...
It felt right that way.
There were multiple times like that , were your HQ choice had actual influence on your army composition.
F.E. A nurgle CSM lord allowed you plague marines as troops.
some of the stuff was allbeit preety ridicoulus.
AFAIK, they do something similar in AoS.
When you use certain "cults" / allegiances (not sure about the correct word, but I think you'll get what I mean), you can use certain units can be used as battleline. Maybe we'll see something similar in 40k (again, someday in the distant future)...
