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.
2025/04/16 05:05:08
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Since this is unlikely to ever come up again I may as well throw my ₹2 in...
I never liked the idea that marines could drop from orbit and then just jump out of their red-hot, smoking drop pod like they were getting out of their Rhino-Pattern minivans.
I thought a good Drop Pod rule would be:
Turn 1: Place Closed Drop Pods (with scatter and fleeing people under them as needed), sit there the rest of the turn.
(Bad guys get to shoot the pods and try to blow them up with the marines inside)
Turn 2: Pods open and marines jump out.
This offsets the great advantages of drop pods (deep strike, block line of sight, disrupt enemy formations) with a major disadvantage that you have to sit and do nothing for a turn, while presumably in range of all the enemy guns.
Obviously the new fixed doors makes this impossible, but I thought I'd toss it out.
2025/04/16 05:15:25
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Turn 1: Place Closed Drop Pods (with scatter and fleeing people under them as needed), sit there the rest of the turn.
(Bad guys get to shoot the pods and try to blow them up with the marines inside)
Turn 2: Pods open and marines jump out.
This was the rule introduced for the Laniena roadshow pods, and I have a vague inkling it was the rule for the original Forgeworld pods as well.
But when 4th edition added pods to the codex as an actual model option, they needed to give people a reason to buy them over rhinos... and since sitting inside a transport in 4th edition was pretty much a death sentence, allowing Marines to immediately get out on landing gave them a distinct tactical edge.
The odd thing was that they made the pods too good to not take them, but then waited until everyone had made their own out of pringles cans and plumbing supplies before releasing the plastic kit...
2025/04/16 06:00:34
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
The odd thing was that they made the pods too good to not take them, but then waited until everyone had made their own out of pringles cans and plumbing supplies before releasing the plastic kit...
There was one specific gatoraide bottle design I though worked really well, hexagon shape and lots X hatching designs on each side.
But it was an expensive option, they were $2-$3 a bottle.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/04/16 06:01:04
2025/04/16 07:22:24
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Andykp wrote: So much rage over a new drop pod?? The old one had doors you could shut, so what, the doors never closed after they landed, they stayed open, said so in the fluff so what was the point of the does closing on the model, other than making rocket noises as you put it on the table!
As for the “fear” that each one only holds 5 marines, don’t be daft you can see space for each marine in the harness clamp things, 2 per door, so 10. Stop panicking it will be ok.
Drop pod models should be cheap and easy to build as they are more terrain than vehicle so this kit is perfect, it lost a storm bolter, so what, the storm bolter wasn’t the defining feature of the model. Losing the doors as has been suggested would have been a bigger change to what has been the definitive feature of the drop pod, it opening up like petals of a flower.
They have made a model that is more usable, easier to build but still serves the exact same purpose as the old when, this is just better and good move by GW. I can easily imagine sales of drop pods haven’t been great for a while now and this kit will sell. I have had my current marine army since primaris arrived and haven’t been interested in buying a drop pod because the kit was a pain, these I will 100% pick up a box and bet I’m not alone in that.
The defining feature of the drop pod was that it provided a rule that didn't necessitate a model. They've always been wrong for the tabletop.
Disagree, I think they need a model just so show where they’ve landed and look cool. Rules wise no, but immersion wise 100% need to be represented.
OK, they could just sell them as terrain, or a collectors piece etc. They just let a unit deepstrike and effectively nothing else. I don't see a clamouring for necron portals, gsc sewer entrances, warp portals, dropships etc. For other races to also add immersion and clutter to the table whilst doing nothing.
2025/04/16 07:49:44
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Andykp wrote: So much rage over a new drop pod?? The old one had doors you could shut, so what, the doors never closed after they landed, they stayed open, said so in the fluff so what was the point of the does closing on the model, other than making rocket noises as you put it on the table!
As for the “fear” that each one only holds 5 marines, don’t be daft you can see space for each marine in the harness clamp things, 2 per door, so 10. Stop panicking it will be ok.
Drop pod models should be cheap and easy to build as they are more terrain than vehicle so this kit is perfect, it lost a storm bolter, so what, the storm bolter wasn’t the defining feature of the model. Losing the doors as has been suggested would have been a bigger change to what has been the definitive feature of the drop pod, it opening up like petals of a flower.
They have made a model that is more usable, easier to build but still serves the exact same purpose as the old when, this is just better and good move by GW. I can easily imagine sales of drop pods haven’t been great for a while now and this kit will sell. I have had my current marine army since primaris arrived and haven’t been interested in buying a drop pod because the kit was a pain, these I will 100% pick up a box and bet I’m not alone in that.
The defining feature of the drop pod was that it provided a rule that didn't necessitate a model. They've always been wrong for the tabletop.
Disagree, I think they need a model just so show where they’ve landed and look cool. Rules wise no, but immersion wise 100% need to be represented.
OK, they could just sell them as terrain, or a collectors piece etc. They just let a unit deepstrike and effectively nothing else. I don't see a clamouring for necron portals, gsc sewer entrances, warp portals, dropships etc. For other races to also add immersion and clutter to the table whilst doing nothing.
All that’s sounds good, I’d like those. None are quite the same as a drop pod though. Difference is drop pods had epic models and lots or artwork before they appeared in 40K rules, we knew what they looked like and how they appeared. I suppose it all depends on how much representation you want for the rules, if they did it your way where the drop pods magically disappeared off the battlefield after landing and models just deepstriked (deep struck?) in I would think that was awful and lazy and it’d be better not to have the rule at all without a model. The other things you describe are a bit more abstract so not as bad although I don’t like the GSC stuff that much for the same reason. Personal taste I suppose.
2025/04/16 13:44:15
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Lathe Biosas wrote: I would gladly support Drop Pod models if they did something different than just allowing models to Deep Strike.
If the removed terrain like Ruins where they landed would be cool and different.
It'd also make placing them easier. If a terrain piece is removed to add a new one (the drop pod) there is more chance of managing to get it on the battlefield.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/04/16 15:03:05
Turn 1: Place Closed Drop Pods (with scatter and fleeing people under them as needed), sit there the rest of the turn.
(Bad guys get to shoot the pods and try to blow them up with the marines inside)
Turn 2: Pods open and marines jump out.
This was the rule introduced for the Laniena roadshow pods, and I have a vague inkling it was the rule for the original Forgeworld pods as well.
But when 4th edition added pods to the codex as an actual model option, they needed to give people a reason to buy them over rhinos... and since sitting inside a transport in 4th edition was pretty much a death sentence, allowing Marines to immediately get out on landing gave them a distinct tactical edge.
You'd have thought that something that just survived being dropped from orbit should be able to laugh off a round of small arms fire.
2025/04/16 17:40:22
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Turn 1: Place Closed Drop Pods (with scatter and fleeing people under them as needed), sit there the rest of the turn.
(Bad guys get to shoot the pods and try to blow them up with the marines inside)
Turn 2: Pods open and marines jump out.
This was the rule introduced for the Laniena roadshow pods, and I have a vague inkling it was the rule for the original Forgeworld pods as well.
But when 4th edition added pods to the codex as an actual model option, they needed to give people a reason to buy them over rhinos... and since sitting inside a transport in 4th edition was pretty much a death sentence, allowing Marines to immediately get out on landing gave them a distinct tactical edge.
You'd have thought that something that just survived being dropped from orbit should be able to laugh off a round of small arms fire.
"How many atmospheres can the ship withstand?"
"Well, it's a spaceship, so anywhere between zero and one!"
2025/04/16 18:06:00
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Lathe Biosas wrote: I would gladly support Drop Pod models if they did something different than just allowing models to Deep Strike.
They do several things different besides just allowing DS.
1) They allow embarked units to DS on turn 1.
2) They & their passengers don't count against the limitations of how many units/pts you can place into reserves.
3) If placed right they also move block your opponent - this effect gets even better if you also use Deathwind pods & dreadnaught pods (see Legends for both of these).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/04/16 18:07:05
2025/04/16 20:36:47
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Lathe Biosas wrote: I would gladly support Drop Pod models if they did something different than just allowing models to Deep Strike.
They do several things different besides just allowing DS.
1) They allow embarked units to DS on turn 1.
2) They & their passengers don't count against the limitations of how many units/pts you can place into reserves.
3) If placed right they also move block your opponent - this effect gets even better if you also use Deathwind pods & dreadnaught pods (see Legends for both of these).
1 & 2 for most people simply fall under "letting a unit deepstrike", yes it modifies it, but it snot changing the primary purpose of the rule.
3 is literally the issue and the reason the rules are changing we can assume.
2025/04/16 22:07:26
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Lathe Biosas wrote: I would gladly support Drop Pod models if they did something different than just allowing models to Deep Strike.
They do several things different besides just allowing DS.
1) They allow embarked units to DS on turn 1.
2) They & their passengers don't count against the limitations of how many units/pts you can place into reserves.
3) If placed right they also move block your opponent - this effect gets even better if you also use Deathwind pods & dreadnaught pods (see Legends for both of these).
1 & 2 for most people simply fall under "letting a unit deepstrike", yes it modifies it, but it snot changing the primary purpose of the rule.
Then those people don't understand the primary function of the pod - allowing that 1st turn Deepstrike.
Dudeface wrote: 3 is literally the issue and the reason the rules are changing we can assume.
Whatever it changes to, I'm still going to be move blocking the enemy
2025/04/16 22:33:45
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Then those people don't understand the primary function of the pod - allowing that 1st turn Deepstrike.
The point is that allowing a first turn deep strike doesn't inherently require a large vehicle model.. Before it was added as a model, the drop pod did just confer the ability to deep strike, by placing the models straight onto the board.
Having the model looks better, but if that's all it does then it's just a very expensive deep strike token.
2025/04/17 00:18:13
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Then those people don't understand the primary function of the pod - allowing that 1st turn Deepstrike.
The point is that allowing a first turn deep strike doesn't inherently require a large vehicle model.. Before it was added as a model, the drop pod did just confer the ability to deep strike, by placing the models straight onto the board.
Having the model looks better, but if that's all it does then it's just a very expensive deep strike token.
And thats my issue. As it stands it's essentially a really tall token. It doesn't do anything that couldn't be a simple rule... you don't need a model for teleportariums.
BorderCountess wrote: Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...
It is basically a token/terrain piece, but has an iconic look. Same reason things like basilisks, manticores and deathstrikes have models when they would be more accurately represented as hits coming from off the table.
2025/04/17 03:10:16
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Except in the case of basilisks, manticores and death strikes, your opponent has the opportunity to stop them from doing the thing they're supposed to do, and they function as a part of your army while they're on the table.
The drop pod just sits there.
2025/04/17 07:02:46
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Mixed bag, mostly for the worst imo. Seems to be a nailing down of what constitutes WE and making sure niches are covered. Looks more like orks in power armour than ever.
2025/04/17 07:18:46
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
insaniak wrote: Except in the case of basilisks, manticores and death strikes, your opponent has the opportunity to stop them from doing the thing they're supposed to do, and they function as a part of your army while they're on the table.
The drop pod just sits there.
Well, once upon a time, the opponent DID have the opportunity to prevent them landing.
And then came several editions worth of dumbing down the rules.
Now days? While you can't really outright stop them landing, you can block them from deploying effectively.
And if you don't think those pods are "functioning as part of my army" just as much as a Basilisk or whatever would ? Well....
2025/04/17 07:48:19
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
And if you don't think those pods are "functioning as part of my army" just as much as a Basilisk or whatever would ? Well....
With the weapons gone, what actions can you take with the drop pod once it's on the table?
Contest/hold an objective?
How is it going to contest an objective if it can't shoot?
I don't know about you, but I really doubt a unit of soldiers are going to see the harmless drop pod and say "well, looks like we're stuck. That immobile, unarmed hunk of metal is completing impeding our ability to walk over there and secure that area. It's not as if we can just shoot that thing without our own weapons unmolested."
A preacher can at least shoot back and is somewhat a threat.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2025/04/17 10:28:16
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2025/04/17 11:45:43
Subject: Warhammer 40k news and rumours. New SM Drop Pod pg. 175
Presumably the pod is still connected into the Imperial comms and surveillance net, so it could be smashing out jamming and active surveillance supporting the general efforts.
I agree it doesn’t make a lot of sense, but you can crowbar in some vague reasons for it
I mean if a massive hunk of metal can just fall out of the sky, then that might discourage enemies from getting near the objective in case something else drops out of the sky. Also presumably the thing could be detonated remotely, even if that’s not currently an in-game option
Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!
Other than the Deathwind variant? They’re just one way rapid transport. A way to get your team of genetically altered psychopaths in might as well be impenetrable armour exactly where the enemy most likely doesn’t want teams of enemy genetically altered psychopaths in might as well be impenetrable armour, in a manner that outside of excellently designed AA cover, is basically unstoppable.
Right down your throat, right on top of your position.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
6000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 
4000 pts - 
1000 pts - 
1000 pts 
~4100
~1660
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0