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.

Also, we have no idea if he has an icon on his chestplate since it's impossible to see most of it.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
[
So are we not counting the iconography on his shoulder pads at all then?

That appears to be just his squad number on the left (6) and on the right is the tag showing he's wearing his 'Thursday' set of armour.

I only ever played against squats once back in 2nd (and it was mainly kit bashed squats from left over fantasy dwarfs + space marine weapons). The new egg shaped main portion of the body armour does look somewhat like the old exo-armour model after modernising it to the point of no longer looking like an armoured mr potato head (this guy: https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Exo-armour). Would be really cool if both armour scales of old squats had some kind of representation - the tougher guardsmen and bikers in the Grendlsen style plus the more elite hearthguard like the latest preview.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Andykp wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Andykp wrote:
These models aren’t going to look like old squats, but you will be able to tell they are squats, the lore released so far is not contrary to any of the old stuff, it’s nods to nostalgia.

They also aren’t going to be fantasy dwarves, even dwarves in fantasy aren’t fantasy dwarves anymore.

I personally hope they don’t do the heavy ornamentation thing, so glad I got the option on marines to not got that route. Less is more sometimes. But tastes vary, but I for one am just happy they are were my main opponent in my early days playing 1st/2nd edition and can’t wait to have them back.

I've not seen anyone here saying they want heavy ornamentation, just something to give them a more noticeable theme and make them less bland. It doesn't have anything at all, not even the same level of ornamentation/detail most other basic troopers get.

It’s ok to leave some stuff for painters to do, it’s nice to have some space to paint. It’s a personal preference thing, I like my models uncluttered personally. Others like the “gothic” OTT look. For all we know this range might have both. His lack of ornamentation currently makes him stand out, as does his nearly imperial/nearly tau weapons. It’s all familiar but not quite. A bit like I hope the faction will be, not quite imperial, not quite not. Like I said I am glad they are back, I would have loved squats just like bob olleys but think I will love these too, and they might stick around this time. What ever through. Squats are BACK! I am a happy camper.

Again, as I've said several times in this thread so far, a small faction logo somewhere on their armour would not be some drastic over-the-top gothic grimdark level of detail. It would simply be the same level of ornamentation commonly seen on the majority of basic troops across various 40k armies.

So are we not counting the iconography on his shoulder pads at all then?

No, because those are decals / painted on and not part of the actual design of the miniature itself. I didn't count the various Space Marine chapter transfers and Guard regiment badges and all that either because it's specifically about the miniature design and the level of army-themed detail/embellishments/ornamentation on that and not how they've been painted.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Also, we have no idea if he has an icon on his chestplate since it's impossible to see most of it.

We have a piece of artwork that clearly shows the middle of the chestplate and there's nothing.

I think the lack of iconography is weird given everything else in 40k.

But at the same time, I think it's hard to judge an entire new faction based upon a single interesting-if-a-little-dull mini.

 insaniak wrote:

 Miguelsan wrote:

Starship Troopers the movie is 75% Cadians as it came after the models we still use today, and copied heavily the IG aesthetics of the time. .

Starship Troopers was released in 1997. The plastic Cadians arrived in the early 2000s.

The infantry uniforms in Starship Troopers were closer in design to the original metal Cadians (which do predate the movie) than the current plastics.

What's the deal with "GW copying SHT" that crops up frequently on the board whenever some sort of quasi-contemporary-sci-fi kit is released? Like, everything GW makes is somehow based heavily on SHT? I've never even seen that movie, but I see aspects of many different futuristic / modern day aesthetics in GW stuff. It's so bizarre that so many people want to link it to SHT. It seems like an obsession with some people.

They're grunts. With flak armour and helmets and rifles. It's not SHT guys. It's sci-fi infantry. There's onyl so many ways to do it. You can't just say "Oh look, it's SHT'. Well you can ofc, but it's absurd when you do. Tedious and lazy and naïve.

Starship Troopers (the movie) had the same satiric tone as 40k. It also used a lot of the same thematic and visual elements. They are a natural fit together.

If you haven’t seen Starship Troopers, I highly recommend that you do, especially if you are a fan of 40k.

Wait. I just realized his shoulders are impossibly high...

JWBS wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Miguelsan wrote:

Starship Troopers the movie is 75% Cadians as it came after the models we still use today, and copied heavily the IG aesthetics of the time. .

Starship Troopers was released in 1997. The plastic Cadians arrived in the early 2000s.

The infantry uniforms in Starship Troopers were closer in design to the original metal Cadians (which do predate the movie) than the current plastics.

What's the deal with "GW copying SHT" that crops up frequently on the board whenever some sort of quasi-contemporary-sci-fi kit is released? Like, everything GW makes is somehow based heavily on SHT? I've never even seen that movie, but I see aspects of many different futuristic / modern day aesthetics in GW stuff. It's so bizarre that so many people want to link it to SHT. It seems like an obsession with some people.

They're grunts. With flak armour and helmets and rifles. It's not SHT guys. It's sci-fi infantry. There's onyl so many ways to do it. You can't just say "Oh look, it's SHT'. Well you can ofc, but it's absurd when you do. Tedious and lazy and naïve.

Because Guard vs Nids looks very much like it, so it’s easy to then compare.

Also, what’s the H you’re using in SHT?

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
Wait. I just realized his shoulders are impossibly high...

They might have attached the arms too high when assembling the model, or he's shrugging.

 jeff white wrote:
Personally, as interesting as squats returning might be, I just wish that GW would get their core game elements and factions right before introducing or perhaps reintroducing novel or novelty models for the SALEZ. New and improved is the lie of the last hundred years, tiresome on every front, and GW is wearing even this suspect trope thin.

Yeah, meh… not interested in the least.

Thank you! You can play with the pay pigs you have NOW GW, when these dry up we'll let you have more. But for right now play with the fat little bearded fan wallets you have now!

JWBS wrote:

What's the deal with "GW copying SHT" that crops up frequently on the board whenever some sort of quasi-contemporary-sci-fi kit is released? Like, everything GW makes is somehow based heavily on SHT? I've never even seen that movie, but I see aspects of many different futuristic / modern day aesthetics in GW stuff. It's so bizarre that so many people want to link it to SHT. It seems like an obsession with some people.

They're grunts. With flak armour and helmets and rifles. It's not SHT guys. It's sci-fi infantry. There's onyl so many ways to do it. You can't just say "Oh look, it's SHT'. Well you can ofc, but it's absurd when you do. Tedious and lazy and naïve.

No idea what 'SHT' is, but if you're referring to the Starship Troopers link, it's generally brought up specifically to do with Guard, because Starship Troopers had infantry who looked an awful lot like Cadians, and psychic officers who look like Commissars.

It's less common for people to claim that GW was copying ST, because the GW stuff came first. It's more common for people to suggest that GW drew inspiration heavily from Aliens during 2nd edition because, well, they did.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
Wait. I just realized his shoulders are impossibly high...

They might have attached the arms too high when assembling the model, or he's shrugging.

Or it's just the shoulder pads.

 insaniak wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
Wait. I just realized his shoulders are impossibly high...

They might have attached the arms too high when assembling the model, or he's shrugging.

Or it's just the shoulder pads.

No, his armpits are above his jawline.

 insaniak wrote:

JWBS wrote:

What's the deal with "GW copying SHT" that crops up frequently on the board whenever some sort of quasi-contemporary-sci-fi kit is released? Like, everything GW makes is somehow based heavily on SHT? I've never even seen that movie, but I see aspects of many different futuristic / modern day aesthetics in GW stuff. It's so bizarre that so many people want to link it to SHT. It seems like an obsession with some people.

They're grunts. With flak armour and helmets and rifles. It's not SHT guys. It's sci-fi infantry. There's onyl so many ways to do it. You can't just say "Oh look, it's SHT'. Well you can ofc, but it's absurd when you do. Tedious and lazy and naïve.

No idea what 'SHT' is, but if you're referring to the Starship Troopers link, it's generally brought up specifically to do with Guard, because Starship Troopers had infantry who looked an awful lot like Cadians, and psychic officers who look like Commissars.

It's less common for people to claim that GW was copying ST, because the GW stuff came first. It's more common for people to suggest that GW drew inspiration heavily from Aliens during 2nd edition because, well, they did.

The 3rd edition Tyranid release had some SST vibes going on.

And Aliens. Majorly.

I'm excited to find out how they were there all along. If they don't make an Agatha Harkness joke, I'll be disappointed.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
Wait. I just realized his shoulders are impossibly high...

Now go look Space Marine and Terminator models, or the artwork for various Space Marines and Terminators.

The shoulders aren't too high, the head's too low, and it may as well be a feature of GW's art style at this point.

 solkan wrote:

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
Wait. I just realized his shoulders are impossibly high...

Now go look Space Marine and Terminator models, or the artwork for various Space Marines and Terminators.

The shoulders aren't too high, the head's too low, and it may as well be a feature of GW's art style at this point.

Could be slouching like an Ork

Yeah, I think technically the shoulders aren't the problem, it's the way GW does the neck sockets, with heads set very low and nothing either side of the neck, which results in a hunched appearance and nothing connecting the shoulders to the torso. It's previously been most prominent in any Terminator character with raised arms.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
No, because those are decals / painted on and not part of the actual design of the miniature itself. I didn't count the various Space Marine chapter transfers and Guard regiment badges and all that either because it's specifically about the miniature design and the level of army-themed detail/embellishments/ornamentation on that and not how they've been painted.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Also, we have no idea if he has an icon on his chestplate since it's impossible to see most of it.

We have a piece of artwork that clearly shows the middle of the chestplate and there's nothing.

Man that's rough. You should probably skip this whole thing then since you'll clearly not be able to tell what they are without a big fat bearded dwarf head sculpted anywhere else than his own head.

I have no idea how GW didnt manage to run this by your quality assurance test group first. Clearly GW have failed and should fall upon their collective swords since depending on decals is a bridge too far.

 insaniak wrote:

JWBS wrote:

What's the deal with "GW copying SHT" that crops up frequently on the board whenever some sort of quasi-contemporary-sci-fi kit is released? Like, everything GW makes is somehow based heavily on SHT? I've never even seen that movie, but I see aspects of many different futuristic / modern day aesthetics in GW stuff. It's so bizarre that so many people want to link it to SHT. It seems like an obsession with some people.

They're grunts. With flak armour and helmets and rifles. It's not SHT guys. It's sci-fi infantry. There's onyl so many ways to do it. You can't just say "Oh look, it's SHT'. Well you can ofc, but it's absurd when you do. Tedious and lazy and naïve.

No idea what 'SHT' is, but if you're referring to the Starship Troopers link, it's generally brought up specifically to do with Guard, because Starship Troopers had infantry who looked an awful lot like Cadians, and psychic officers who look like Commissars.

SHT obviously stands for Stars' Hip Troopers, a charming family comedy about a man and his hips's standing army.

Not if squats stand on the new bases, then it's almost head standing army.

M.

 Wiz Warrior wrote:
Eldar are great, but you dont see an elf head as their belt buckle to show you they are "ELDAR tm".

In the case of Craftworld Eldar, you have the ever-amusing game of "how many spirit stones have I missed on this model" instead, as well as the other, unexplained, lumpy bits.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
So are we not counting the iconography on his shoulder pads at all then?

Given they appear to be either transfers or freehand, I believe someone had a phrase regarding "...comparing a pineapple to a potato" that applies here.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I have to admit I’m perplexed about people who want GW to make more generic Sci Fi troopers. You can buy lots of generic Sci Fi troopers right now, for a third of the price (or less!). GW charges a lot for minis set in their IP—why spend trademarked IP bling money on a mini without the trademarked IP bling?

If Space Marines and guard and Eldar are too GW for you…are you sure you want to buy GW minis?

For some it's gw or nothing. Gw logo makes it automatically better even if it looks identical with 5xprice

So I wonder if we're going to see any more reveals of the rest of the blacked out silhouettes from the video on Saturday today? I've very curious to see what these guys are all about.

The new Squat armor looks like some kind of Mechanic's jumpsuit with a hard armor shell on the shoulders. That armor looks like American Football shoulder pads crossed with hard body armor bullet proof vest.

All in a cleanish scifi way.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Andykp wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Andykp wrote:
These models aren’t going to look like old squats, but you will be able to tell they are squats, the lore released so far is not contrary to any of the old stuff, it’s nods to nostalgia.

They also aren’t going to be fantasy dwarves, even dwarves in fantasy aren’t fantasy dwarves anymore.

I personally hope they don’t do the heavy ornamentation thing, so glad I got the option on marines to not got that route. Less is more sometimes. But tastes vary, but I for one am just happy they are were my main opponent in my early days playing 1st/2nd edition and can’t wait to have them back.

I've not seen anyone here saying they want heavy ornamentation, just something to give them a more noticeable theme and make them less bland. It doesn't have anything at all, not even the same level of ornamentation/detail most other basic troopers get.

It’s ok to leave some stuff for painters to do, it’s nice to have some space to paint. It’s a personal preference thing, I like my models uncluttered personally. Others like the “gothic” OTT look. For all we know this range might have both. His lack of ornamentation currently makes him stand out, as does his nearly imperial/nearly tau weapons. It’s all familiar but not quite. A bit like I hope the faction will be, not quite imperial, not quite not. Like I said I am glad they are back, I would have loved squats just like bob olleys but think I will love these too, and they might stick around this time. What ever through. Squats are BACK! I am a happy camper.

Again, as I've said several times in this thread so far, a small faction logo somewhere on their armour would not be some drastic over-the-top gothic grimdark level of detail. It would simply be the same level of ornamentation commonly seen on the majority of basic troops across various 40k armies.

So are we not counting the iconography on his shoulder pads at all then?

No, because those are decals / painted on and not part of the actual design of the miniature itself. I didn't count the various Space Marine chapter transfers and Guard regiment badges and all that either because it's specifically about the miniature design and the level of army-themed detail/embellishments/ornamentation on that and not how they've been painted.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Also, we have no idea if he has an icon on his chestplate since it's impossible to see most of it.

We have a piece of artwork that clearly shows the middle of the chestplate and there's nothing.

So your only gripe is that it doesn’t have any moulded specific iconography on it. That’s pretty minor. My guess as to why this is goes back to old squat lore that they seem to be tapping in to. The squats weren’t a unified race or army. They were a series of leagues of strongholds, each run independently. Lots of small factions that cooperated. So a single badge, like the Aquila wouldn’t make sense. Much as the dark eldar or ORKS don’t have a single emblem that unites them. (I know all armies are assigned a “faction” symbol but that’s for a rules point of view not in game). Now if they bring back the guilds, they may have symbols, so specialists in the leagues like engineers or what ever may well have iconography.

But really, if yiu main complaint is that the belt buckles are a bit plain then it’s not too bad.

Could someone point me to these oft-repeated ”Tau elements” are, since (all) that I’m seeing here is Van Saar energy weapons coupled with a heavier version of the Genestealer mining gear?

Backpack’s like a modernized version of the KO Arkanaut one, but those three are all the design influences I’m spotting, maybe apart from Volkite weaponry concept art.

Maybe the runes that could reasonably be read as TAU

Wow some big-time humble pie from me, I was completely wrong!
Sincere apologies to everyone lumped in with the "lol as if they will bring back Squats" comment previously.
I very nearly wrote that I would eat my hat, complete with ketchup, and photograph evidence if they did come back - so very glad I didn't do that now

I am so, so shocked. This would have been absolutely, utterly unfathomable 10-20 years ago. I would say on the same level of God and the Devil joining forces (perhaps on the same level as a combined Mario/Sonic game in the 90s.. )

It does definitely show how much things have changed! I will say congrats to GW, this could well be the first dedicated 40k minis I have bought in over a decade if it turns out they make a half decent job of them.