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 know GW wants to engage in some kind of retro style, so I gave Ballistius dreadnought an old boxnought upper body but with long and jointed legs. ------ but it made it look very weird.


No, considering its boxy upper body, it's better to give it stubby legs.or just keep its jointed weapon-arm.


AND:
are there any conversion sample,conversion the redemptor dreadnought into a more traditional form - retaining the leg joints but making them appear short and stubby, making it look like an enlarged version of Castaferrum dreadnought?

I can see why some wouldn't like the legs, but I think they're an improvement on the old box-naught. They're a bit more in proportion and look far more functional than before.

I fished out my old lascannon-and-missile boxnaught after the event - first time it's seen the light of day in a few editions. After comparing it with this for a while, I'm honestly pretty happy with the Ballistus; they've managed to update the classic to the more modern 'redemptor' look without going over the top.

Also something about it tickles my inner Battletech fan, for some reason.

I think it would look much better already if you just gave it the two additional hip plates from the Brutalis kit, as that would reduce the visible 'air' under the boxy torso considerably. Other than that it's mostly fine imho.

I think it looks fine. Fairly good glow up of the classic, without a lot of the excesses the pile on most primaris things.

My old TLLC/ML dread for comparison.

I like the ballistus dread as is, and think it will be better in person. I’ll grant that the legs are not it’s strong point, and the low angle shot does not help with that. When looking at it from above, as you would on the tabletop, the torso should hide a lot of the legginess that people are complaining about.

 Drachii wrote:
I fished out my old lascannon-and-missile boxnaught after the event - first time it's seen the light of day in a few editions. After comparing it with this for a while, I'm honestly pretty happy with the Ballistus; they've managed to update the classic to the more modern 'redemptor' look without going over the top.

Same. It looks less like a Primaris Uber Dread and more like an update to the boxnaught, with enough points of articulation that it actually looks like it can move.

Between it, the sternguard and the terminators, GW did what they should have done with the 'primaris' update in the first place.

Also something about it tickles my inner Battletech fan, for some reason.

It reminds me a lot of a Catapult or Clan Vulture and similar mechs (though without the obvious bird-legs)

I like this new Dread. It does look lanky, but that’s due to the arms not extending below the torso, giving it a very different outline.

But it’s no Deredeo. And it seems the Deredeo is coming….

Better than the old box Dread, but that's not saying anything because box Dreads are just bad models in general.

The Redemptors, while I'm not the BIGGEST fan of them, improve on the idea and actually look like they can walk and hit stuff.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Better than the old box Dread, but that's not saying anything because box Dreads are just bad models in general.

The Redemptors, while I'm not the BIGGEST fan of them, improve on the idea and actually look like they can walk and hit stuff.

What is next, terminators are bad looking models ? This is a primaris dreadnought looks like a primaris dreadnought with a specific old load out. I don't think that GW gave it a good service making the weapons look exactly like the old dreadnought guns. Maybe the lascanons should be held by the dreadnought and the rocket launcher be an above shoulder mount or something. Although then it would look like a bigger broadside probably. A lot of the previews this year were linked with older models being shown, as if GW was trying to tell everyone that the new stuff is just like the old stuff, only a bit different and that they should buy it.

Karol wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Better than the old box Dread, but that's not saying anything because box Dreads are just bad models in general.

The Redemptors, while I'm not the BIGGEST fan of them, improve on the idea and actually look like they can walk and hit stuff.

What is next, terminators are bad looking models ?

I actually detested old Terminators and the new ones are a significant improvement. Grey Knight ones are......okay overall, but look amazing to the regular Loyalist/Traitor ones.

New Terminators are an improvement. They’ve certainly got their bulk back and I’m here for that.

But, and I cannot explain why, none have come close to comparing to the original Terminator models.

They were quite wildly out of scale, almost from the point of release. Certainly their Storm Bolters were barely largely than Bolt Pistols.

But man. There’s just something about their look that really worked, and has never been quite recaptured again.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
New Terminators are an improvement. They’ve certainly got their bulk back and I’m here for that.

But, and I cannot explain why, none have come close to comparing to the original Terminator models.

They were quite wildly out of scale, almost from the point of release. Certainly their Storm Bolters were barely largely than Bolt Pistols.

But man. There’s just something about their look that really worked, and has never been quite recaptured again.

The old RT era ones? Agree 100%. I like the 2nd ed era ones too. The 4th ed ones are the worst of the Indomitus pattern, although none of the other variants do much for me either.

Special shoutout to the late 2nd(?) Terminator Captain though. One of my faves. The RT Captain is top notch as well.

As Grotsnik said, it's because it doesn't have real arms.

I think it looks great.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But it’s no Deredeo. And it seems the Deredeo is coming….

*happy dance*

I love myself some dreadnoughts.

Am I the only one to notice it doesn't have a top turret? The brutalis and redemptor, including the tactical war suit, have some type of weapon on top.

Saw a cool way to utilize the 2nd chest guard in the Primaris dreadnought box, use it as a chest guard for the war suit.

EDIT: Just saw a redemptor pic from the same angle (probably the same time) with no noticeable top turret.

Question: Why do most, if not all, dreads have an empty left hand and the right hand is the big gun?

The “empty” hand is normally a dreadnought sized powerfist with a built-in/underslung weapon. Often a stormbolter or HF.

So it’s a bit of shooting, a bit of crushing. Balanced TAC setup.

 Nevelon wrote:
The “empty” hand is normally a dreadnought sized powerfist with a built-in/underslung weapon. Often a stormbolter or HF.

So it’s a bit of shooting, a bit of crushing. Balanced TAC setup.

I think it was a question as to which was their dominant hand and why is it always the same one.

Dudeface wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
The “empty” hand is normally a dreadnought sized powerfist with a built-in/underslung weapon. Often a stormbolter or HF.

So it’s a bit of shooting, a bit of crushing. Balanced TAC setup.

I think it was a question as to which was their dominant hand and why is it always the same one.

In-setting iirc all SM are ambidextrous anyway due to training and messing with their brains, so it should not matter.

Real-world it's probably just because most people are right-handed and it comes to sculptors naturally that way; once you have chosen one side to be the CC-weapon side you'll pretty much stick to it to make the parts easily interchangeable, especially in the 80s/90s where it was all big lumps of metal.

I find the legs/boxy upper body to be super weird... do not like this look at all... I'll definitely be clipping/modifying mine to make it a bit boxier

It's pretty much the same as the Redemptor, isn't it? It just looks like the armor on the legs is skinnier.

 Valkyrie wrote:
I can see why some wouldn't like the legs, but I think they're an improvement on the old box-naught. They're a bit more in proportion and look far more functional than before.

^^ This! I've long disliked the legs on dreadnoughts as being far too short, stumpy and just looking so strange. Ok for a static pose but lacking any sense of how they'd really move properly. These longer legs I think work far better, perhaps being a little on the thin side; but I think real world impressions will be a bit more positive over purely looking at photos.

I never liked the thicc n short look of Castaferrum legs and always built mine without the lower leg armour plates. I even preferred the "thin chicken leg" look that gave me over the standard build.

IMO this new dread looks fine. It's no furibundus though, but at least its not like the invictor warsuit either

Dudeface wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
The “empty” hand is normally a dreadnought sized powerfist with a built-in/underslung weapon. Often a stormbolter or HF.

So it’s a bit of shooting, a bit of crushing. Balanced TAC setup.

I think it was a question as to which was their dominant hand and why is it always the same one.

Bingo. While a post saying they're ambidextrous does answer the question. If not ambidextrous, then I'd want my dominant hand a powerfist and the left hand a gun. Speaking personally, it's not that much harder shooting something with your non-dom hand compared to the gap when wielding a sword with the non-dom hand.

Looks fine. This along with the Redemptor and Brutalis Dreadnought are what Dreadnoughts should have been, but GW were limited with what they could produce back in the day. So now we are getting this cool new toys.

I strongly suspect that the full kit will have options for a Hull mounted top gun.

 stonehorse wrote:
Looks fine. This along with the Redemptor and Brutalis Dreadnought are what Dreadnoughts should have been, but GW were limited with what they could produce back in the day. So now we are getting this cool new toys.

I strongly suspect that the full kit will have options for a Hull mounted top gun.

With no ability to reach and legs being too short to bend properly, I've always thought dreads would be bad in melee.

NorthernXY wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
The “empty” hand is normally a dreadnought sized powerfist with a built-in/underslung weapon. Often a stormbolter or HF.

So it’s a bit of shooting, a bit of crushing. Balanced TAC setup.

I think it was a question as to which was their dominant hand and why is it always the same one.

Bingo. While a post saying they're ambidextrous does answer the question. If not ambidextrous, then I'd want my dominant hand a powerfist and the left hand a gun. Speaking personally, it's not that much harder shooting something with your non-dom hand compared to the gap when wielding a sword with the non-dom hand.

I'm still bugged out by the new Berserker kit because, as good as the models are, literally all of then have pistol-right CCW-left. Absolutely zero variation.

Let's be honest: Most of us couldn't really figure out how the old Angry Washing Machine Dread even moved until this video came out, so having a Dread with longer legs that we can clearly figure out how it moves isn't really a bad thing.

NorthernXY wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
Looks fine. This along with the Redemptor and Brutalis Dreadnought are what Dreadnoughts should have been, but GW were limited with what they could produce back in the day. So now we are getting this cool new toys.

I strongly suspect that the full kit will have options for a Hull mounted top gun.

With no ability to reach and legs being too short to bend properly, I've always thought dreads would be bad in melee.

Melee for a Dreadnought could simply be walking into/stepping on things. Adding a bit of torso spin and arm movement would be plenty to pulverise most targets. Like, if a piece of heavy construction equipment hit a human with any real speed, you're looking at smashed bones and torn flesh. That's without any disruption coming from a powerfist either.

Look at it this way, a car doesn't need arms to f*** you up big time. A much, much, heavier, denser car that isn't bound by a steering radius and can smash through walls with impunity doesn't need to do anything fancy to ruin you day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Let's be honest: Most of us couldn't really figure out how the old Angry Washing Machine Dread even moved until this video came out, so having a Dread with longer legs that we can clearly figure out how it moves isn't really a bad thing.

Boxnaught still reigns supreme.

Also has anyone really thought about the scale of redemptors in general? They're ridiculous!

EviscerationPlague wrote:

NorthernXY wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
The “empty” hand is normally a dreadnought sized powerfist with a built-in/underslung weapon. Often a stormbolter or HF.

So it’s a bit of shooting, a bit of crushing. Balanced TAC setup.

I think it was a question as to which was their dominant hand and why is it always the same one.

Bingo. While a post saying they're ambidextrous does answer the question. If not ambidextrous, then I'd want my dominant hand a powerfist and the left hand a gun. Speaking personally, it's not that much harder shooting something with your non-dom hand compared to the gap when wielding a sword with the non-dom hand.

I'm still bugged out by the new Berserker kit because, as good as the models are, literally all of then have pistol-right CCW-left. Absolutely zero variation.

I just noticed that too. Well, there is a reason "left" in Latin is sinistro.


The new dreads are about the same height as the leviathans, which is less than a meter/couple of feet shorter than the dreadknight and telemon.

NorthernXY wrote:

The new dreads are about the same height as the leviathans, which is less than a meter/couple of feet shorter than the dreadknight and telemon.

Sure, but like, how many guardsmen tall are they? New Guardsmen I suppose, since it's pretty clear everything is coming in at a new scale. Four Guardsmen? They seem very tall, particularly for how they look.

Knights are tall but they look appropriate for their size.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
It just looks like the armor on the legs is skinnier.

I feel like that's where the weird is coming from - the 'shins' are tapered with curved kneepad, and the 'hip' armour is super skinny, they look like they belong to a thinner mech that the chunk of battleship torso. Lose the hip armour so they're just bare joints like the old ones and bulk the shins out to thick slabs of right-angled fury - maybe with high articulated kneepads to protect the upper legs, now it has upper legs (but make them like tombstones rather than rollerblader pads) and I think the length of the legs wouldn't stand out so much.