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.

I have to say tha GW made a nice job here. I hate the LR with a passion yet I find myself liking the less busy version of this new tank. As many of you pointed out the front stubbers need to go, and at least to my eyes, followed by the sponsons. I don't mind the pintle stubber, and will use the skirt version of the kit.

M.

I don't really like the Dorn but I can't really put my finger on why. It's not horrible or anything, I just feel "meh" when I see it.

I'll probably end up using my Macharius as count-as.

I'm planning on getting rid of the hull stunners, and making a twin stunner mount on on coupula and a single stubber mount on the other coupula.

I think it looks better as a tank destroyer:

If only it were not so big. They already shrank the table size down.....

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it looks better as a tank destroyer:

Dmmit, you've just cost me more $ than I was already planning on spending.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it looks better as a tank destroyer:

Holy hell that's good.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
The more I look at it the more I think that if you remove the two front mounted stubbers, and the weirdly placed top stubber, along with the sponsons, the better the tank looks. The twin battle cannon or the single cannon with Autocannon look good. No major issues with that. And the Body of the tank looks good. It's just all the copy pasted on extra guns that look silly. And sponsons on a WW2 style tank...yuck!

All that stuff is optional at least. It looks like the only mandatory weapons are the main turret gun and the front hull gun.

Of course they might be "voluntary" like free weapons in kragnos. Sure you don't have to...but you miss on free weapons.

So, what is the better setup? Dakka platform with Stubbers, heavy bolters, and gatling cannon or the anti-tank version with multi-meltas, and meltaguns?

I'm leaning towards dakka platform.

 cuda1179 wrote:
So, what is the better setup? Dakka platform with Stubbers, heavy bolters, and gatling cannon or the anti-tank version with multi-meltas, and meltaguns?

I'm leaning towards dakka platform.

Well depends on stats and points.

tneva82 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
So, what is the better setup? Dakka platform with Stubbers, heavy bolters, and gatling cannon or the anti-tank version with multi-meltas, and meltaguns?

I'm leaning towards dakka platform.

Well depends on stats and points.

And what you expect to be shooting at.

I'm not a fan of the tank, but I do like the names of the new guns:

Oppressor cannon, Castigator gatling cannon and Pulveriser cannon.

I hope the Rogal Dorn has optional front hull weapons, I would much prefer the hull lights in the 'shopped image.

The big gatling gun will be enough front firepower for me.

Besides the heavy stubbers protrude beyond the tracks at track height, that is all sorts of wrong.

ccs wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
So, what is the better setup? Dakka platform with Stubbers, heavy bolters, and gatling cannon or the anti-tank version with multi-meltas, and meltaguns?

I'm leaning towards dakka platform.

Well depends on stats and points.

And what you expect to be shooting at.

For a monster like that, it has to be take on all comers. A wide range of preferred targets works for a tank which is almost a super-heavy.

 Orlanth wrote:
I hope the Rogal Dorn has optional front hull weapons, I would much prefer the hull lights in the 'shopped image.

The big gatling gun will be enough front firepower for me.

Besides the heavy stubbers protrude beyond the tracks at track height, that is all sorts of wrong.

The hull lights aren’t part of the photoshop. Look at the rear tank here:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it looks better as a tank destroyer:

Perfect, that illustrates an vague notion I had looking at the shape of the hull. It's too bad we don't have access to 00s-era Forge World anymore, they would surely have produced fantastic conversion kits for the basic Dorn chassis.

As it is, I think we can do it ourselves Upscaled versions of the Destroyer tank hunter and Thunderer siege tank would be the most obvious ones, but I'm also keen to see how it'd look with a big dozer blade and other engineering/recovery gear mounted on it.

the big (haha) advantage of the upscaled tank is that now you can go straight for 1/35 scale models to replace them

always wanted a Ragnarok but thought it might be too much work to convert it, now you just take a 1/35 KV-2, replace the gun barrel and be done

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it looks better as a tank destroyer:

Stick a pintle mounted onslaught gatling cannon and autocanon on the cupolas and you have a legal tank.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
It's too bad we don't have access to 00s-era Forge World anymore, they would surely have produced fantastic conversion kits for the basic Dorn chassis.

You're right. They absolutely would.

The "Ferrus Manus" Tank Destroyer.

Personally I am going to have to simplify it before I like it, Too many guns is the ONLY thing I dont like, otherwise I love it. I hated the Leman Russ though.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it looks better as a tank destroyer:

Boxify it a bit and you absolutely have the Churchill gun carriage. One of the ugliest tanks ever devised

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/a22d-churchill-gun-carrier?amp

Just looking at the oddly placed hull Heavy Stubbers (and by extension the Meltaguns)

Whilst still derpy looking (and I’d worry about snappage) they are nicely head height.

 MinscS2 wrote:
I don't really like the Dorn but I can't really put my finger on why. It's not horrible or anything, I just feel "meh" when I see it.

I know what is missing: a darker paint tone, spikes, and chaos symbols

The tank looks great from above, but weird in the other views.
Now that I see that you can drop the extremely ugly hull stubbers and add skirts, it is growing on me. I think it might be a tank that will look a lot better without the cartoony studio scheme. Now it looks like a toy, but with less guns and a proper weathered and grimdark scheme, I think it will look really good.

Damn, that thing is the picture of beauty itself! Now that is a tank!

Well done, GW!

I like the Dorn in a vacuum, but I'm afraid it doesn't mesh well visually with the other Guard chasses. Too many rounded bits, different track links, etc.

I do appreciate that you can take it with as little as 2 different weapon profiles on one tank, it's getting obnoxious how much time all the dumb little extra guns they stick everywhere take to resolve.

It's true I probably would like, for example, the Repulsor better if more of the many extra grenade pods and heavy stubbers and random gribblies on it were fully optional.

Its a stug (photoshop one)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I think it looks better as a tank destroyer:

Wow. That's a massive improvement. Kudos.

If you go for the tank-hunter, the turret alone might look nice on a turret emplacement.

Yes, or gifted to a friendly neighborhood Mekboy... :-P