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.

Now that I have one in hand, and did the press fit assembly - it's not as bad in person. Maybe it'll get bad again after painting. Right now in bare plastic it kind of looks like some sort of Deep Sea Vehicle with wheels. Super low slung and wide. Like a hydroplane maybe.

The Chaplain Bike is nice. If that's what the Outrider Stand Alone Kit is going to be like, all I can say is Yummy. It's so much nicer and feels like it'll be easier to paint sub sections than the giant fewer part pieces of the Outriders. It is not Press Fit.

The Turret is Press Fit, and feels like you'll still want to magnetize it because little plastic pegs break very easily, but this and the ATV both feel like they were made with GW giving up and making it easy for us to magnetize our models now.

There are several incredibly disturbing aspects of the Turret. The gunner is missing a hand/forearm which was replaced with a prosthetic R2D2 hand plugged into the console of the turret. There's a cable going from the control panel into the guy's eye.

How big is the ATV?
If you had to base it, what size would you use?

I’ll wait for build pics to filter down, as right now I’m not sold on the looks. Would not be the first time GW shot themselves in the foot with bad pics of OK models. I still have the thought of taking a GSC Ridgerunner and turning it into a phobos maned SM light attack vehicle.

Sounds like the turret gunner is at least partially slaved to the gun. I dig that. Maybe you could convert a couple of them onto the cart and possibly make it look less Hasbro by way of Nintendo. Similar to the pilots of Chaos Hellblades. Though I doubt any amount of converting would ever actually make it look good.

 Nevelon wrote:
How big is the ATV?
If you had to base it, what size would you use?

I’ll wait for build pics to filter down, as right now I’m not sold on the looks. Would not be the first time GW shot themselves in the foot with bad pics of OK models. I still have the thought of taking a GSC Ridgerunner and turning it into a phobos maned SM light attack vehicle.

It’s sitting on an upside down flyer base, and it actually looks pretty good on it. I’d be tempted to base them on one voluntarily.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Sounds like the turret gunner is at least partially slaved to the gun. I dig that. Maybe you could convert a couple of them onto the cart and possibly make it look less Hasbro by way of Nintendo. Similar to the pilots of Chaos Hellblades. Though I doubt any amount of converting would ever actually make it look good.

It's definitely a little "Congratulations on becoming the Dark Angels Master of the Forge. We're now going to weld and wire you into a pod on the Rock until you die. Well forever, but when you die we'll do it again to someone else." vibe.

My issue with the go-kart is that it's armoured everywhere except the front. It has a single armour panel in the middle there, but everything else is open, whereas every other part of it has plates stopping incoming shots.

And the gun shield is way too small.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My issue with the go-kart is that it's armoured everywhere except the front. It has a single armour panel in the middle there, but everything else is open, whereas every other part of it has plates stopping incoming shots.

And the gun shield is way too small.

The Driver is sunk way down low, you actually can't see too much of him if you twist and turn the model between the armor panels and the wheels.

There are two gun shields, each gun has a different shield because the one is taller than the other, as such the pegs on the gunner hands go into the top of one gun the bottom of the other but it remains the same basic height. I haven't done it yet, but I suspect you could clip the pegs and be able to just pick and stick the guns in between his hands without a magnet.

To me it just looks like someone took the Batmobile from the Dark Knight films and stripped off most of the armour.

 vipoid wrote:
To me it just looks like someone took the Batmobile from the Dark Knight films and stripped off most of the armour.

There is something to that. even some of the molded details scream Bale Batman Tumbler Batmobile.

Breton wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
How big is the ATV?
If you had to base it, what size would you use?

I’ll wait for build pics to filter down, as right now I’m not sold on the looks. Would not be the first time GW shot themselves in the foot with bad pics of OK models. I still have the thought of taking a GSC Ridgerunner and turning it into a phobos maned SM light attack vehicle.

It’s sitting on an upside down flyer base, and it actually looks pretty good on it. I’d be tempted to base them on one voluntarily.

Thanks for that. GW’s website says the ridgerunner comes with a 92mm/120mm base, which is the flyer base. It looks like it might fill it out a bit better then the ATV, but no so much to cross the line into unacceptable counts-as IMHO.

Goofy looks aside, how did gw ever think that thing qualifies as a bike? That's a vehicle.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Goofy looks aside, how did gw ever think that thing qualifies as a bike? That's a vehicle.

Its purely done for rules. To deny anti-vehicle weapons like Haywire.

Because yes, that is a vehicle more then it is a quad bike.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Goofy looks aside, how did gw ever think that thing qualifies as a bike? That's a vehicle.

Thing is, bikes not being vehicles is a rules distrinction, not a description; in real life bikes are vehicles.

The bike keyword is to some extent a factor of it's role, but is moreso a means of giving a model certain attributes, and not others.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My issue with the go-kart is that it's armoured everywhere except the front. It has a single armour panel in the middle there, but everything else is open, whereas every other part of it has plates stopping incoming shots.

Yep. It would probably look better if the front wheel had armour like the rear wheels, but I'm not gonna buy two of these to convert one better looking one. In fact I didn't buy even one. I'm on the fence whether this is a lost cause or an interesting conversion challenge. I don't hate it nearly as much as most people, but it's not exactly a great model either.

Ordana wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Goofy looks aside, how did gw ever think that thing qualifies as a bike? That's a vehicle.

Its purely done for rules. To deny anti-vehicle weapons like Haywire.

Because yes, that is a vehicle more then it is a quad bike.

harlokin wrote:Thing is, bikes not being vehicles is a rules distrinction, not a description; in real life bikes are vehicles.

The bike keyword is to some extent a factor of it's role, but is moreso a means of giving a model certain attributes, and not others.

Yeah, I know that, that's the point. It allows it to benefit from rules that it probably shouldn't. Like being resurrected at full wounds by an apothecary, for starters.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yeah, I know that, that's the point. It allows it to benefit from rules that it probably shouldn't. Like being resurrected at full wounds by an apothecary, for starters.

Misunderstood, agree completely ...... bikes IMO shouldn't be resurrectable either tho

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yeah, I know that, that's the point. It allows it to benefit from rules that it probably shouldn't. Like being resurrected at full wounds by an apothecary, for starters.

Misunderstood, agree completely ...... bikes IMO shouldn't be resurrectable either tho

I get what they're doing, and don't mind... They're treating the bike/ATV as a giant suit of armor. Its just fast instead of invuln Terminator armor. So the medic is healing the bikER, not the bike.

Breton wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yeah, I know that, that's the point. It allows it to benefit from rules that it probably shouldn't. Like being resurrected at full wounds by an apothecary, for starters.

Misunderstood, agree completely ...... bikes IMO shouldn't be resurrectable either tho

I get what they're doing, and don't mind... They're treating the bike/ATV as a giant suit of armor. Its just fast instead of invuln Terminator armor. So the medic is healing the bikER, not the bike.

But its got WHEELS dammit....what kind of medic heals wheels?

Breton wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yeah, I know that, that's the point. It allows it to benefit from rules that it probably shouldn't. Like being resurrected at full wounds by an apothecary, for starters.

Misunderstood, agree completely ...... bikes IMO shouldn't be resurrectable either tho

I get what they're doing, and don't mind... They're treating the bike/ATV as a giant suit of armor. Its just fast instead of invuln Terminator armor. So the medic is healing the bikER, not the bike.

Groovy, then a Mastodon is a HUGE suit of armor. Guess the medic can heal the driver instead of the tank. Totally logical.

Primaris Chapain on Bike if it's a precursor to the Outrider stand alone - the exhaust pipes fit better the outer shell around the engine compartment isn't connected to them and is seperate. The Biker legs are seperate and can be added after paining the bike behind the leg. They're hipattached like those Intercessors from a couple boxed sets ago. OVerall much easier to paint most and attach a last couple pieces.

 Crimson wrote:
Yep. It would probably look better if the front wheel had armour like the rear wheels, but I'm not gonna buy two of these to convert one better looking one. In fact I didn't buy even one. I'm on the fence whether this is a lost cause or an interesting conversion challenge. I don't hate it nearly as much as most people, but it's not exactly a great model either.

Exactly my stand on it. Admittedly - I did think the Centurions were silly too, until I saw some in person and loved them so much that I got my own. There's a certain amount of depth and chunkiness that the 2d pictures - even the 3d spinning pictures - don't properly convey.

For me, knowing how I'd felt about Centurions previously, I think I knew that I'd like most of the model itself but those exposed front wheels just don't do it for me. I expect my Marine vehicles to be armoured and unnecessarily chonky, whereas that wheel setup wouldn't look out of place on an Ork bike.

 harlokin wrote:

Breton wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yeah, I know that, that's the point. It allows it to benefit from rules that it probably shouldn't. Like being resurrected at full wounds by an apothecary, for starters.

Misunderstood, agree completely ...... bikes IMO shouldn't be resurrectable either tho

I get what they're doing, and don't mind... They're treating the bike/ATV as a giant suit of armor. Its just fast instead of invuln Terminator armor. So the medic is healing the bikER, not the bike.

But its got WHEELS dammit....what kind of medic heals wheels?

He's not healing the wheels, he's healing the rider. They've decided instead of a techmarine repiaring the punctured tire, they're going to have the Apothecary repair the punctured lung.

I was hellbent on changing the front wheels on the ATV, but like the OP, when I put it together, it looked fine and I'm digging it. I glued the MM in place (even though its somewhat easy to switch to onslaught), simply because the armies I plan to plug them into (Ravenwing and Ravenguard) lack AT currently, but have anti infantry in spades.

Not surprised. All SM models improve tremendously as soon as you remove the Fisher Price toddler toy default paint scheme.

Could you take the rear armor and put it in front, rather than buy a second bike to do that conversion on both ends, and end up with a heavy armor side with "point towards enemy" writen all over it?

I don't know if the pieces would lend themselves to that, though.

I agree, looks much cooler in person.

Would also look pretty neat with some Orky bitz and a pair of boyz rockin’ it.

Breton wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Yeah, I know that, that's the point. It allows it to benefit from rules that it probably shouldn't. Like being resurrected at full wounds by an apothecary, for starters.

Misunderstood, agree completely ...... bikes IMO shouldn't be resurrectable either tho

I get what they're doing, and don't mind... They're treating the bike/ATV as a giant suit of armor. Its just fast instead of invuln Terminator armor. So the medic is healing the bikER, not the bike.

I'm fine with them being resurrected, as long as you just remove the bike/atv and replace it with an intercessor on foot.

lord_blackfang wrote:Not surprised. All SM models improve tremendously as soon as you remove the Fisher Price toddler toy default paint scheme.

how true this is

 Crimson wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
My issue with the go-kart is that it's armoured everywhere except the front. It has a single armour panel in the middle there, but everything else is open, whereas every other part of it has plates stopping incoming shots.

Yep. It would probably look better if the front wheel had armour like the rear wheels, but I'm not gonna buy two of these to convert one better looking one. In fact I didn't buy even one. I'm on the fence whether this is a lost cause or an interesting conversion challenge. I don't hate it nearly as much as most people, but it's not exactly a great model either.

I went the opposite direction and trimmed the rear wheel covers off:



I don't think it really fixes the model, but I do like it better.

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Goofy looks aside, how did gw ever think that thing qualifies as a bike? That's a vehicle.

Thing is, bikes not being vehicles is a rules distrinction, not a description; in real life bikes are vehicles.

The bike keyword is to some extent a factor of it's role, but is moreso a means of giving a model certain attributes, and not others.

I thought the problem with this abomination is GW gave it both keywords so it alls it to break too many core rules.

Ice_can wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Goofy looks aside, how did gw ever think that thing qualifies as a bike? That's a vehicle.

Thing is, bikes not being vehicles is a rules distrinction, not a description; in real life bikes are vehicles.

The bike keyword is to some extent a factor of it's role, but is moreso a means of giving a model certain attributes, and not others.

I thought the problem with this abomination is GW gave it both keywords so it alls it to break too many core rules.

If you mean they gave it BIKER and VEHICLE - no, it just has BIKER, as far as I can see in the new book.

If you didn't mean that, then I'm sorry, but I'm not following you.

 Dysartes wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 harlokin wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Goofy looks aside, how did gw ever think that thing qualifies as a bike? That's a vehicle.

Thing is, bikes not being vehicles is a rules distrinction, not a description; in real life bikes are vehicles.

The bike keyword is to some extent a factor of it's role, but is moreso a means of giving a model certain attributes, and not others.

I thought the problem with this abomination is GW gave it both keywords so it alls it to break too many core rules.

If you mean they gave it BIKER and VEHICLE - no, it just has BIKER, as far as I can see in the new book.

If you didn't mean that, then I'm sorry, but I'm not following you.

Yeah the way some reviewers were talking I thought GW had gone full WTF and given it both keywords.

It definataly is a vehical not a biker, but I suspect it's not going to change because of ravenwing. But it definitely shouldn't be benifiting from half the rules it does from being a biker not the vehical that it is actually is.