>>93190194
>TQ
Things to get gud.

File: 1571624196127.jpg (12 KB, 189x342)

12 KB JPG

>>93190194
>What are you still waiting for?
my most recent package from wtg

>>93190194
>TQ
The money for my tanks

>>93190194
>What are you still waiting for?
I dont know, something amazing i guess...

>>93190194
>/folder/FepmWCBL#mVFzgCLouF_RDkRX9LgNeg
>/folder/s9xQ3CiA#9a594y1utfRGxKLxiIy2aQ/folder/QkpUCIhK

These don't work. Can somebody fix that?

>>93190194
>TQ
I'm waiting for quite a bit actually. I've got 18 thallax coming from a sale by one of my recasters, waiting on WTG to ship me my fucking Recon squads and esoterist, and I literally just got the shipping notification for my 3d printed melee tech thralls. Really though this is stuff I ordered a while ago, right now I'm in a holding pattern because I have too much stuff unpainted and I'm waiting for the mechanicum box to come out. Only thing I've ordered recently is some fancy Cataphractii to maybe use as my command squad that turned out to be too small.

>>93190194
>TQ
Another comically large box of resin to come in the mail
and motivation

File: 1549165472989.jpg (91 KB, 556x606)

91 KB JPG

i miss my 4th heavy support slot

>>93190194
He's cute

>>93190321
spend the points on tactical marines instead like God intended

File: 11082425a.jpg (167 KB, 1200x848)

167 KB JPG

>>93190194
A refund from bitsbay for never sending out my order and this thing to come out. After I get the refund I'll probably grab the bits I need from somewhere else.

>>93190194
MELEE UPGRADES FUCKING WHEN JAMES

>>93190194
>TQ
MkII/V despoilers and assault marines in plastic, smart arses, figure I've got about a decade to go.

File: 1713679876179353.jpg (56 KB, 868x824)

56 KB JPG

>>93190345
wish our inductii were cool

File: 1713713673149950.jpg (213 KB, 535x464)

213 KB JPG

>>93190633
they're unironically the best of the lot in terms of flavor and character

>>93190649
they have no character or flavor. we shouldve had the IF or IH inductii. like give the sarge a phosphex bomb or be able to take a heavy bolter or something

>>93190194
>What are you still waiting for?
Melee upgrades, coming spring 2024.

File: 1620790075371.jpg (287 KB, 661x608)

287 KB JPG

>>93190681
>automatamarines
hands down the most wicked inductii and i'm sorry if you don't concur because it is in fact so

>>93190699
they are the worst inductii, dont even feel like IW. they feel more like IH and IH inductii feel like IW.

>>93190699
What are the Inductii rules? I'm thinking about starting up IW.

>>93190776
immune to pinning. must fire at the closest target. no cool wargear upgrades. they are terrible.

>>93190722
i think you don't even love your legion
i would go as far to say you've no real grasp on what is meant by iron within and without
>>93190776
https://litter.catbox.moe/vn75n5.pdf
they're in here at the back of the book

>>93190799
>i think you don't even love your legion
>i would go as far to say you've no real grasp on what is meant by iron within and without
there is nothing IW about those shitty inductii rules

File: 1716934377778086.png (879 KB, 735x616)

879 KB PNG

>>93190817
perturabo came to despise his own sons for their humanity and the inherent frailty therein and thus were his later children stripped of it entirely
this was a guy who scorned them so utterly he preferred custom domitar to whatever they might have offered him in the way of capacity for protection of his person
automatamarines are hilariously on the money and again, the coolest of all inductii choices by a good mile because of just how flavorful having them be subject to pseudo programmed behavior is. no others are so extremely affected.

>>93190865
yeah because it makes sense that one of the most tactical legions would have the bulk of their marines lobotomized to the point they just brainlessly mag dump the closest thing... lmao. its a retarded asspull and feels more like IH than IW, if you disagree you are just a retard.

>>93190865
>no others are so extremely affected
The phrase you're looking for is "penalized for existing". You might also substitute "worthless on the tabletop" if WE Inductii didn't exist.

>>93190865
>perturabo came to despise his own sons for their humanity and the inherent frailty therein and thus were his later children stripped of it entirely
This literally sounds like you're describing Ferrus Manus word for word.

>>93190949
ferrus never hated his children, he simply always expected better of them and grappled merely with disappointment as opposed to loathing which was very much more the lot of pert or angron

>>93190965
>ferrus never hated his children
yes he did

File: 1712485854467732.png (1.36 MB, 1033x726)

1.36 MB PNG

>>93190978
too strong a word

>>93190991
he thought they were pathetic and weak and he hated him for it. its basically his entire character.

File: k977t5w.gif (2.88 MB, 600x451)

2.88 MB GIF

>>93190194
>TQ
Legend rules for the Ordinatus Sagittar in 2.0. And a plastic Malcador Defender with rules for HH.

Oh, and some kind of quick search tool for all those fucking special rules and weapon stats.

File: 20240628_192721~2.jpg (1 MB, 3024x1511)

1 MB JPG

>>93190194
>What are you still waiting for?
A model. Any model.

>>93190194
>models
new mark II box and/or despoiler kit, plastic dreadclaws and a fire raptor.
>rules
armour on dreads, remove brutal, scrap legion abilities, scrap breaching replace with rending, scrap brutal, hand out AP2 to ordnance, all shooting reactions hit on 6s, legion specifics are purchaseable for all units including ammo, scrap requirements for rites of war.

If we get none of it I'm buying mechanicum for the collection and never playing again.

>>93191133
>and never playing again
Well, sounds like nothing will change for you at least.

>playing
People actually play this garbage?

>>93191133
>armour on dreads
No, i dont wanna have to have the debates over where side and front are, just remove their deflector bullshit.
>Remove brutal
Remove brutal off of TH, on dreads its fine.
>Scrap legion abilities.
No balance them better not scrap them.
>Scrap breaching
No, breaching as a rule again is fine, but it should be expanded to Breaching(X/Y) where a roll of x results in the attack having AP Y, give us more range and balance to work with.
>Hand out AP2 to ordinance
Yes and now, thats dangerous water to be tredding because then its going to be HH1.0 parking lot template spam all over.
>All shooting reactions hit on 6
If we scrapped reactions and just went back to old school over watch? Sure. If we are keeping the reaction system? No, just make intercept unable to intercept with heavy weapons, and return fire with heavy weapons return fire at a -1 to hit.
>Legion specific crap purchasable by anyone.
Yes
>scrpa requirements for RoW.
No, just address some of the stupid ones, we dont need RoW with out any draw backs thats stupid

>>93191133
Why not go play 1.0 then if you don’t like 2.0

the absolute removal of artillery from the game is just proof that john french is a drooling pissbaby retard who tried footslogging his terminators in 1.0 and got rightfully punished for it so when he got to write 2.0 he removed it.

>>93191314
>removes the worst part of every single GW game ever
Is French THE most based man at GW? Making artilleryniggers cry is pretty based

File: john french pissbaby.jpg (111 KB, 530x670)

111 KB JPG

>>93191339
t.

>>93191387
*whips out cock* do you want daddy to piss on you again…

>50% of 1.0 problems were taken advantage of by IWniggers
>50% of 2.0 problems were taken advantage of by IFniggers

Its one big bolterfag world and we’re just living in it.

File: images (2) (19).jpg (34 KB, 506x606)

34 KB JPG

>>93191214
>Reactions
People say it like it's 3 HSS doing 9 shooting reactions every turn. Curb heavy weapons, and people will react with Plasma guns, Rotor cannons and Fury of the Legion.
I also do believe people who complain about Intercept are deep striking a single unit in the open, and have never faced that guy who deesptrikes 60 Tacticals in Crimson Court or Hammerstrike.
If reactions bother you so much, try this:
>Reactions need a LD check to proc, else they fire as Snapshots
It's a dice throw, which is fair, it's also reliable enough, and players can interact with it:
Attack at night to make it harder to react
Bring a vox to better relay commands
Use Fear to instill chaos and disorder
Attach an IC so orders are obeyed without doubt
And so on and so forth
Also, then make Interceptor follow the 3 limit per phase like most other reactions?
>>93191133
>Reactions hit on a 6
Then every unit would get to react, because Overwatch was available to every unit back when it hit on 6s.
Not to mention people still complained about overwatch "making melee useless". You could go back all the way to 2E and people would still find things to complain about.

File: FkWaIIqWYAUEf9A (1).jpg (16 KB, 350x200)

16 KB JPG

>>93191465
>non-LOS shooting has been a problem in literally every GW product since 5th edition 40k including fantasy, AOS, and skirmish games and always teeters between overpowered and uselessly overnerfed.
Hmm, I wonder if this is a sign of something.

File: sigismund354.jpg (305 KB, 1080x2073)

305 KB JPG

>>93191457

>>93191507
Anon you're treading close to dangerously based territory of true LOS being stupid and needing to go back to 4th edition LOS rules.

>>93191133
>>93191133
>AV on dreads
GW has never made them worth taking when this was the case. Remember that Centurions and GK baby carriers are a direct result of this. Monstrous creatures are fine, just up the points cost to reflect that.

>Brutal
Make thunder hammers 20 or 25 points per and it’s fine. We do this at my store and the power fist standard has returned.

>Breaching
What’s up with breaching?

>AP2 ord
I’m fine with this if the points reflect it, and it’s significantly scaled back. At minimum AP4/Rend 4+ for artillery, and AP2 for the best/most expensive ones. It’s a shame that even vindicators can’t blow up vehicles anymore.

>Shooting reactions on 6s
This works well for heavy weapons alone, is about as effective as nothing for the rest of the arsenal. Vehicles should be able to react in full, however.

>Legion Specifics
Sure

>no requirements for RoW
Silly.

File: images (3) (14).jpg (21 KB, 295x400)

21 KB JPG

>>93191387

>>93191523
What are those 4e LoS rules? I'm an Inductii, and do not know what has been lost

>>93191501
>People say it like it's 3 HSS doing 9 shooting reactions every turn. Curb heavy weapons, and people will react with Plasma guns, Rotor cannons and Fury of the Legion.
Honestly, they should be reacting with weapons like that, the major problem child is the HSS and las canons. i would fix it by saying Heavy weapons just cant intercept, and they can only fire snapshots at reacting, Or make it so HSS just cant intercept or return fire. Shit that would make support squads finally have a reason to exist.
As for people who complain about DS, no it really is that oppressive, and i have odne the shit like DS 40 tacs and terminators. No matter how you slice it getting lit the fuck up by 3 reactions is brutal as fuck. Hiding them is pretty pointless too because if you dont get them doing their bullshit on the turn the comes in, they are fucked when your opponent goes.

The truht of the matter is, the problem child of all of this, is the heavy support squad.

File: sigismund be like.jpg (221 KB, 811x1316)

221 KB JPG

>>93191530

File: 1718810590596941.png (758 KB, 656x1000)

758 KB PNG

>>93191214
>I don't want debates on where there sides and front are
things that never happened up next. But seriously if that was ever an issue just give them a single AV.
>remove brutal on TH but dreads is fine
eh I don't see why it is necessary at all, maybe in a world with no instant death from doubling out toughness.
>balance them better
fools errand and it's just another thing to balance that brings nothing to the game other than funnelling people into certain legions when otherwise aesthetics might prevail, which would provide better representation.
>change to breaching X/Y
it being complex enough is reason to scrap it, making it more complex is, funnily enough, worse. The game only needs rending and if a shot can pierce ceramite it can rend anything built by imperium, breaching is unnecessary.
>AP2 to ordnance is HH1.0 parking spam all over again
wow transport/vehicles are relevant again. Removing instant death would help here too admittedly, why do we have that rule again?
>can't hit on 6s with new reactions
because?
>RoW without drawbacks is stupid
because? The RoW will still specify certain units, not taking them just means you don't make best use of the RoW which is incentive enough without actively limiting your options. It would also stop funnelling people into the same lists while letting them do fluffy things and get rewarded for it.

>>93191527
If we restored AP3 for basilisks, then space marines wouldn't be taken
My question is: what would happen if AP2 was restored for Vindicators? Besides everyone taking them for Dreads. Do keep in mind the Typhon is the same as a Vindicator, but with more Brutal and blast size

>>93191543
>Fix it by making the squad whose sole purpose is shooting big guns can't Return Fire or Intercept
Bruh

>>93191560
>wow transport/vehicles are relevant again.
You're not giving an incentive to transports, you're simply penalizing walking.
You're having a worse game and think that makes consequences matter more. Smdh

>>93191637
>you're simply penalizing walking.
footslogging terminators SHOULD be penalized, french.

>>93191585
I’d be fine with basilisks having AP3, anyone familiar with playing any previous ed of 40k knows about artillery crashing out saves.

I think vindis still do 1 wound to dreads, as they don’t double out the T7 value. I don’t know the stats of the typhon but if it’s similar enough I also wouldn’t mind it gaining reasonable AP again, as AP4/BR6 isn’t justifiable on most of the artillery platforms

>>93191133
>hand out AP2 to ordnance

yeah let's make SA the go-to army by giving their fucking dedicated transports a gun that auto-kills 9/10 of 2+/4++ instead of just 1/59 of them on Rending and better than 1/2 of them on non-Rending

that'll really improve the game if there's nothing but endless whining in these threads about how SA have to take a useless troops tax to get their fucking Dedicated Transports with the big guns

>>93191682
right now SA are unplayably bad so yeah why not.

>>93191560
>things that never happened
NTA I’ve seen a lot of retards attempt it, even before HH.

>wow making transports relevant again
As if they aren’t now, and couldn’t be popped open previously? Parking lots decimated everything short of raiders, and those got unlucky or popped by other shit just as frequently.

>why is ID a thing?
Because it’s a great rule. Fuck around too much with a melee squad and get your HQ walloped, fuck around in plain sight of multi meltas and get turned to slag.

>>93191662
>Destroys walking
>"Ackshually, terminators..."
French is teleporting them. Meanwhile you are negating the iconic Tactical blobs of 30k for everyone.
For an Alpha saboteur, you are okay. Falseflagger

>>93191666
>I think vindis still do 1 wound to dreads, as they don’t double out the T7 value
They're Brutal 3 dummy. Go read the rules, then you can tell me about changing them kek
>>93191682
>yeah let's make SA the go-to army by giving their fucking dedicated transports a gun that auto-kills 9/10 of 2+/4++ instead of just 1/59 of them on Rending and better than 1/2 of them on non-Rending
This. Oof. We'd be getting all the bad from 1.0 with all the bad from 2.0. the worst of both worlds

>>93191720
>French is teleporting them
yes, and now he is charging out of deepstrike too lmao. the only reason arty got nerfed is because in 1.0 french's dumb ass was teleporting them in, in a blob, and getting deleted by arty because he is too dumb to buy a spartan.

File: IMG_6717.jpg (1.48 MB, 4032x3024)

1.48 MB JPG

>>93191736
>they’re brutal 3! (Snort)
Yeah and they still do one, singular wound to dreads you fat retard. Picrel is my vindicator.

>>93191750
... But artillery's never been able to intercept? So it's the destruction of walking for nothing

>>93191796
>pissbaby doesnt even know how brutal works
top kek

>>93191750
French has mind raped you lol W rizz on his part

>>93191800
>... But artillery's never been able to intercept?
you dont have to intercept when you cant charge out of ds and are forced to be in base to base. lmao. french was deepstrking terminators into a pie plate and wondering why he was losing games, thats the retard writing the rules right now.

>>93191607
If you think that right now, as it is, a HSS easily being able to shoot 3 to 4 times in a turn is so how kosher, IDK what the fuck to tell you anon.

In a single game round a HSS Can fire las canons in their shooting phase, in an intercept, in a return fire, and in an over watch.

HSS Are a problem child right now, its why EVERY FUCKING LIST, runs them.

>>93191796
Not if they gain AP2 whilst retaining Brutal 3. They will do some 2 wounds after saves.
They will do 6 wounds on Castraferrum though, because they do have S12 against their T6, and Castraferrum get full 3W for every ID wound they get.
I shall keep snorting at you if you keep saying things like that :^)

Welcome to shitpost hell.

For the rest of us: anyone working on any interesting projects?

>>93191830
>2 wounds, after saves
>on a single 3” pie plate
>6 ID wounds, on a single 3” pie plate
Interesting math, tardlet.

>>93191833
Merely fluff

>>93191813
maybe just dont have the dumbest GW employee writing rules, pissfag.

>>93191560
>making it more complex is, funnily enough, worse.
No its the opposite, it gives you more levels to balance.
Breaching (X/Y) is not fucking hard to understand and if you are to unwilling or stupid to get it, you proably should not be playing it.
Breaching(X/Y): On a to wound roll of X or more, the attack is resolved at AP Y.
Thats it, thats all of it, you can now apply that to a entire range of weapons to make them more appealing or fit more narratively and balance wise into the game.
It opens the door to weapons gaining the ability ot be breaching AP3. Its not hard to get.
>wow transport/vehicles are relevant again.
they have never been relevent. The only transports in the game that were ever relevant were the Dracon transport because it was the fucking price of a rhino and some change and had a demo canon on it and flare shield.
You could argue the relevancy of the Land raiders though, those are more tanks that happen to have transports as well.
>>93191682
This the HH1.0 meta was "LOL Template spam." Lets NOT fucking go back to that please.

>>93191833
I'm converting tartaros Terminators characters out if custodian aquilon Terminators to go with my embiggemed napking tartaros and tortuga Cataphractii termies

>>93191876
If you want him to spend less time writing rules and more time dicking you down you better get to flipping more burgers

>>93191920
you poor attempts at trolling are as illegible as your ruleswriting, french.

>>93191863
1x 3" "pie" plate
1 hit
Brutal 3 = 3 wound rolls
3 wound rolls that wound on a 2+, because it's a S12 gun on a T6 target
3 * 5/6 = 15/6 = 5/2 = 2.5 wounds
5++ -> 5/2 * 2/*3 = 5/3 = 1.66 unsaved ID wounds
"Castraferrum Atomantic deflector: Instant Death wounds cause 3W instead of slaying this model outright"
1.66 * 3 = 5W

1 small blast = 5W damage
SNORT lmao

File: IMG_6960.jpg (1.43 MB, 2864x2071)

1.43 MB JPG

>>93191833
I’m finally getting back to work on my IH/RG list. I just finished this raider a few days ago and I’m gonna start my Morlocks and Deliverers soon. The list is 4k in total and probably won’t do great at that points level since it’s 90% infantry but I like the fluffy nature of it.

Anyone autistic enough to model the same character in different armor for your dudes?

Like, making both a power armor praetor and a terminator one but using the same bits to show that it's the same guy just wearing different armor for the needs of that deployment

>>93191963
Hmm this actually seems like sigma math. My mistake anon kun. I tip my gyatt to you.

File: 20240628_140908_HDR~2.jpg (1.52 MB, 2781x2991)

1.52 MB JPG

>>93191833
Priming day here.

File: images (1) (4).jpg (41 KB, 551x557)

41 KB JPG

>>93191833
>/My dudes/
>Are fleet based like literally everyone else
>Don't want to be
But Destroyers can only destroy, not protect. The only "peace" there can be is the peace of the graveyard >:(

>>93191980
no my dudes wear cata all the time

>>93191985
Sigmath

>>93192006
What's the color scheme, anon?

the solution to arty is making medusa/basilisk/arquitors s7 ap2

File: ChadLivesey.png (262 KB, 1281x718)

262 KB PNG

>>93192084
No it is not.
No, I will not elaborate further.

File: IMG_1699.jpg (1.58 MB, 3398x2547)

1.58 MB JPG

>>93191833
Posted it last thread but built a little cardboard bunker while I’m waiting for my paints to arrive and for my printer dude to come back to printing once he’s done being a responsible parent for a while.

Tempted to do the retro cactus terrain next honestly, making terrain is very fun, especially when it’s so cheap.

File: 1700091530992066.jpg (99 KB, 414x446)

99 KB JPG

give the typhon phosphex... s10 phosphex.

>>93191980
I do, my praetor is the obly one who gets 3 minis, everyone else gets a power armor and one pattern of terminator armor or both patterns of terminator armor. The only exception is my Warmonger, the cata version and the tartaros version are explicitly two different people, one is called the little prince because he's the youngest terranborn among the Command staff (based off evander garrius) the other is daemongard and the one of the few among the command staff willing to experiment with the warp. Also the leader of the nullificators of the army (based on Word Bearers Tartaros praetor)

>>93191888
>>93191706
>it gives you more levels to balance
so another thing needing to be balanced and more opportunity to screw up?
>breaching X/Y is not hard to understand
in isolation no, across an entire selection of rules it is just another thing for basically no in game impact and which couldnt be represented as well by rending, which everyone knows.
>transports have never been relevant
exactly, they would be with changes.
>ID is a great rule
because its good to punish positioning with squad wipes where 30 point multiwound models die to 15 point models?

I think people need to ask why rules/restrictions exist rather than comparing the advantages/disadvantages of the 2.0 rules to the 1.0 ruleset. Neither rules were made with particularly good judgement or comprehensive testing.

>>93192170
1.0 was a tried and tested ruleset that had been in use since like 4th ed and was written by bligh who was the best writer gw ever had.

2.0 is written by a literal retard.

>>93192186
>7th ed
>tried and tested

File: 20240627_165142~(1).jpg (1.27 MB, 2484x1704)

1.27 MB JPG

>>93191833
Weathered him and finished 4 other guys. Just need to finish their bases now, which is proving to be a headache without an airbrush (industrial bases with mesh/grid floors, so many recesses to individually paint for an even coat).

>>93192229
theres nothing wrong with 7ths core rules, the problems in 7th came from GW writing unbalanced codex's and introduction of decurion bullshit which is basically what 8th onwards is based on. none of which is present in 1.0

>>93192251
This, its a hot take and i stand by it.
7th ed rules were fine. It was the addition of shit from Angels of death on ward that broke everything into oblivion.

7th ed could be fixed with just a few balance passes/rule changes
>Formations either cost points or have a capped % of free wargear you can take.
>Psyker power balance pass, remove or completely rework invis
>Remove grav
>Put a cap on the amount of modifiers you can stack on a unit.
hh1.0 had its problems mostly with the ease of access to pie plate AP3 and 2, and the easy to abuse psyker powers. Those needed to be fixed. hh2.0 corrected some of them but over corrected.

>>93192186
>1.0 was a tried and tested ruleset that had been in use since like 4th ed
5th edition. Don't use your stupid fucking stolen Valor on me, 5th-7th is nothing like 4th or 3rd edition and 5th was where all the problems with 40k started.

>>93192170
Transports are relevant now, they were not in 1.0. Not sure how you misinterpreted that.

And 30 multiwound models (are there squads that big with 2w in the game? I thought all aux/militia were 1w minus Command) getting outmaneuvered (or even just spotted) is the risk you consistently take with fuckhuge squads. Of course that many models are going to get hit by something, even on terrain dense boards.

I've been playing since 3e, I'm not looking at it from a 1.0-2.0 perspective but from 40k as a whole, which is why I love ID; large point sinks that have insane drawbacks makes them fun and interesting tools to disrupt/meet enormous elite formations without needing exponentially more bodies. It's a balanced and interesting way to represent the strength of weapons in the insane universe.

>>93192229
7th's main rules were fine. Too many people deride 7th without having played it, because like the other guy said, it was just the codexes and formations (which the RoW concept rejiggerd and slam dunked, imo) that fucked it up. You can see this in the initial reaction from 6e to 7e, as people got used to AP3 (instead of save deleting) power weapons and psychic powers not being incredibly lame. I remember power weapons and I think roll to charge in 6e were the two big things that assault armies hated in 6e.

>>93192283
>5th-7th is nothing like 4th or 3rd edition
yeah, 5th-7th is better.

>>93192283
>5th was where all the problems with 40k started.
You can thank the scale of the game getting out ofcontrol.

Ultimately its the root of all the issues of 40k. The rules they are using were designed for a skrimish level game, with at most like...20, maybe 30 models across an army. Rules were if you put down a Land raider that was like, 1/4th or 1/3rd your army right there, if not more, and it was usually a center piece as well.
Now? People look at you if you only bring 1 LR like what the fuck are you gonna do with that?
The games rules are way outside the scale of the game, and that started in 5th ed.

To this day still, 4th ed CRB + 3 and 3.5E codexes is kino hammer.

>>93192292
>(which the RoW concept rejiggerd and slam dunked, imo)
Current RoW are worse design than formations honestly. More often thst not I'm just not taking a ROW because I don't want to play some skew list that spams 5 of the same unit to actually be able to use the narrow benefit, and that's before you get to the differences between them. We need to return to 1.0s ROWs that weren't just "XYZ becomes a troop and fuck you if take anything else"

>>93192305
In terms of content, maybe, but the 4e and 3e rules cleared them by a country mile. The real hot take is that both eras blow the fuck out of 2e, I don't understand how anyone can play that mess of a combat system, even at the small scale of 2e, and enjoy it. Only bearable in Munda and Gorkamorka.

>>93192006
those layer lines
is that a print or

>>93192318
>Current RoW are worse design than formations honestly.
No.
Hard fucking no anon. I almost suspect you never played 7th ed or trauma blocked it out which i dont blame you.
Even the most cheesy RoW does not compare to Formations that would let you take EASY 500+ points of free shit and upgrades across your army.

>>93192318
I agree that current RoWs are too restrictive but worse than formations is a bit much.

>>93192308
>coming to a 30k thread to preach the virtues of a stupid skirmish level game centered around like 30 guys.
kek.

>>93192319
>In terms of content, maybe,
Not even in content, 3rd and 4th ed rules had some of the best content for Warhammer 40k ever.
Know what everyone fucking remembers? The war for Armageddon, the black crusade, the crimson fists. What fucking campaign was even close to as iconic and impressive as Armageddon?

>>93192332
>EASY 500+ points of free shit and upgrades across your army.
thats the current white scars row that gives free fnp lmao

>>93192340
Im not preaching for it you potato monger.
Im saying that the core rules of warhammer were designed for that level of game and they have not advanced enough to support the scale of the game, im not preaching the virtues of it.

>>93192332
Brother I played Tyranids in 7th edition, i know exactly how bad they were. That's why I said WORSE DESIGN, not worse balanced. Formations were much better at actually encouraging you towards a certain playstyle without cramming it up your asshole.

File: Screenshot_20240628_19572(...).jpg (46 KB, 270x286)

46 KB JPG

>>93190910
>You might also substitute "worthless on the tabletop" if WE Inductii didn't exist.
Existence is pain.

>>93192344
bedab and vraks mog armageddon and that pissbaby slop.

File: Respect.jpg (207 KB, 692x1100)

207 KB JPG

>>93192361
>bedab
Ok i kneel.

>>93192356
>Im not preaching for it
>>93192308
>To this day still, 4th ed CRB + 3 and 3.5E codexes is kino hammer.
well?

>>93192372
I said that was the best warhammer was.
Thats because of its rule sets, im not saying we should go back to that anon, im saying thats the best the game was.
The rules need to change to accommodate the current size of it.

>>93192344
Most of the FW books were incredible, and as much as I love Armageddon (I'm running a 3e armageddon campaign at my store right now), Vraks, Badab, Taros, and the Anphelion Project are some of the most fun books ever published by GW, dare I say in scifi wargaming. Not the necron one though, that shit sucked as do 90% of things with that faction.

>>93192380
>I said that was the best warhammer was.
>Thats because of its rule sets, im not saying we should go back to that anon, im saying thats the best the game was.
games of 30 dudes and 1 landraider isnt the best of anything. kek.

>>93192026
You can't huh your children with nuclear arms.

>>93192380
Theoretically, what could bring the ruleset to that standard? We know a rewrite is out of the cards, but what stands as the current fat to slice off for it to work?

Are 2w models becoming more common something to look at? I personally like veteran units being 2w but I can see how that can maybe force some longer engagements.

File: KS-Heartfield_47603_000_01.jpg (50 KB, 460x635)

50 KB JPG

>>93191530
Where are you posting from? I mean, there're a lot of people behind you.

>>93192308
>Rules were if you put down a Land raider that was like, 1/4th or 1/3rd your army right there, if not more
Definitely not more unless you were playing a 500 point combat patrol. Probably the most common game sizes ranged from 1,250 to 1,500, and the stock LR in 4th cost about 250 points. Still an expensive piece of kit, but honestly not far off from what it costs in HH 2.0. The real points gobblers were actual space marines themselves - 15 points a pop for a guy with a Boltgun and absolutely nothing else aside from the statline/ATSKNF/3+ save.

>>93192428
>Are 2w models becoming more common something to look at?
only terminators and bikes should get 2w. remove reactions, add back in arty. there i just cut game time down by like 30%

>>93192428
I mean honestly, you would need to completely upend the turn order of the game.
The IGOUGO method of the game worked for 30 models on a table when you could not have your entire army firing across the board.
For HH you would have to have alternating activations in some capacity.
The biggest thing that would also help with that is to have casualties from the shooting phase removed all at once.
I said it in another thread but i would like to see alternating phases where players do all their movements, then one player does all his shooting, then the other player does all the return shooting, then casualties are removed, then charging happens.
That alone would be a massive help to the game.

Out out doing a complete rule rewrite i would say just alternating phases and shooting happening all at once with both sides removing casualties at the same time would be a good start.

>>93192460
>Bikes
Bikes should be T5.

>>93191214
>Remove brutal off of TH, on dreads its fine.
Only if Terminators get bumped to T5 and TH get bumped to S10. So Power Fists can't instant death Terminators but TH can.
Otherwise, TH without Brutal is just a more expensive power fist.

>>93191527
>Make thunder hammers 20 or 25 points per and it’s fine. We do this at my store and the power fist standard has returned.
Brother they already cost 30 points. They only cost less than that if you're upgrading from a melee weapon with a listed cost, or for a couple of special units that pay less due to lore/bias/etc.

>>93192485
no, fits are 10 points, hammers are 15, you pay the extra 5 points for concussive.
Deal with it.

>>93192460
Is there a single reaction that actually increases game time?

>Shooting ones just mow melee troops down
>Movement ones can entirely stop shooting or charging, skipping an entire unit's rolls

>>93192469
I think I was one of the anons who replied to you, I still don't like AA in 40k based on what I've fooled around with but maybe my group didn't iron out enough kinks.

>>93192475
Small bikes should be T5, Attack bikes T5 and a 2+, but still 1 wound, Sky Hunters T5 and 2 wounds.

>>93192487
Oh no, I mean for the squad upgrades, I think they're 15ppm base on basic cata.

>>93192498
>Is there a single reaction that actually increases game time?
all of them.

>>93192490
I mean the solution is that Brutal should just apply after saves and before damage mitigation.

>>93192516
the solution is removing brutal from the game

>>93192498
>I think they're 15ppm base on basic cata.
Yeah, because they're upgrading from Power Weapons, which cost 15ppm already.

>>93192498
>I still don't like AA in 40k based on what I've fooled around with but maybe my group didn't iron out enough kinks.
unfortunatly its what the game needs.
The whole "One side just fucking unloads itself onto the other while they stand there and get minimal amount of reactions to it" at this scale is to fucking stupid.
>Small bikes should be T5, Attack bikes T5 and a 2+, but still 1 wound, Sky Hunters T5 and 2 wounds.
Na, outriders should be T5 1w, attack bikes should be T5 2 wounds 3+, sky hunters T5 2W 3+
>>93192516
No, brutal should just be removed outright, its far to powerful for what it can do, especially on any weapon tahts swinging at S8+ considers the entire game is T4 stat lined thats ID everything already.

>>93192498
>Sky Hunters T5 and 2 wounds.
fuck no

>>93192531
I think we agree on everything but the attack bikes lol, but trust me, a 2+ save on a 1w attack bike rocks, especially for the cost. They're devils in the editions with similar statlines.

>>93192542
Why not? Still easy enough to snuff out

>>93192565
>Why not?
too durable. its just some dickhead on a bike they arent a terminator

>>93192587
The bike is pretty big, still an elite formation that's liable to be plasma'd to death over 2 turns

>>93192604
its a fast moving unit with heavy weapons they dont deserve to be durable as fuck too.

>>93192516
Yes, if they remove the Insta-Death for 2x strength.

>>93192643
eh, for a 30-35ppm each plus anything that isn't a heavy bolter it's fine. Just use some heavy bolters/plasma/Volkite to counter em. I'm gonna run the changes by my WhiteScarbro and play a game with that, I'll report back if we get a game in soon.

>>93192318
>Current RoW are worse design than formations honestly.
They are lesser, not worse. Which is fine. It's a skewed thing. Skewed enough to be a sidegrade.
7E Formations were simply bonuses, and ended up being rewards to spamming ($$) units you were already wanting to get

>>93192666
>for a 30-35ppm each plus anything that isn't a heavy bolter it's fine
no, thats the cost of a slow as fuck terminator with bad shooting. jetbikes shouldnt comparable durablity while also moving 3x faster and having way better shooting

>>93192418
I am going to hug your organic molecules with subatomic shrapnel x.x

>>93192449
All of them are the BL staff

>>93192688
The termies have a 2+ save and their choice of melee weaponry, still balances out pretty well in the termies favor since you're likely to have more, or even better have some that are WS5.

Why do everyone want W2 sky hunters? The only bikers to ever have 2W were attack bikes which have two marine operators

>>93192708
>Why do everyone want W2 sky hunters?
because white scars players are moronic waacfags.
>>93192706
if anything bikes should be less durable than regular power armor marines because they have more mobility are literally riding around on a highly explosive gas tank

>>93192708
I would be fine with skyhunters being 1w if they got T5.

>>93192490
This.
Brutal 2 on S9 AP2 dread fists is fine because they're not a 5 pts upgrade to a non-brutal S9 AP2 dread fist.
5 pts gets you Concussed added onto a power fist, not Brutal

>>93192718
Nah, the astartes clad their bikes in ceramite, especially the larger targets that don't have to worry about internal hemorrhaging from things hitting them. T5 bikes is a no brainer, not like they can't be swatted out of the sky easily.

>>93192740
Brutal is the answer to an invented problem. Remove Brutal, make castarferrum dreadnoughts 3 wounds, everything bigger 4 wounds, thanatar at 5 wounds, everything that's not a leviathan goes down to 3+/5++. You no longer need Brutal to deal with dreads.

>>93192776
>the astartes clad their bikes in ceramite
you are aware that cladding a highly explosive gas tank in ceramite is still more fragile than cladding a non-explosive space marine meatbag in ceramite, right?

>>93192803
Which is why its a 3+ save, and not a 2+, anon. Plus, the jetbikes don't even have gas tanks, and the outriders don't have theirs visible.

Remove the WS table.
Remove the WS table.
Remove the WS table.
or allow me the ability to buy more WS for units

>>93192718
>>93192803
>soldier wearing armour is stronger than an armoured vehicle, because the vehicle has all sorts of volatile chamicals inside it
0/10.

>>93192823
>jetbikes don't even have gas tanks
yeah rocket fuel is notoriously not explosive as fuck.

File: monkey paw.jpg (27 KB, 512x384)

27 KB JPG

>>93192834
>removes WS table
>keeps the rule
>sells the table as DLC

>>93192845
because motorcycles are known for their durability and not being retarded death traps.

>>93192797
>Brutal is the answer for dreads.
No its not, dreads swing at I4 while all brutal weapons in melee are swinging at I1, you re going to get creamed.
Brutal just does not need to exist, you are almost always better off dealing with dreads at range.

>>93192856
>motorcycles are dangerous because of the gas tank
-1/10

>>93192866
MotorcycleFlippingAndBurstingIntoFlames.webm

>>93192846
They're grav assisted, not much more in there than on a standard bike.

>>93192856
Nah it's a big ole bike, guy is covered pretty well.

>>93192864
...did you read anything past the first 4 words you illiterate retard? I'm AGREEING with you.

File: death trap.png (158 KB, 249x493)

158 KB PNG

>>93192890
it has a fucking jet engine. kek. if anything they should auto explode like a dreadnaught and fuck up their own squad.

>>93192899
No

>>93192890
>They're grav assisted
>grav assisted
>ASSISTED
Gee, I wonder what makes them go forward

>>93192918
Nah they're just bikes, if you need some help clearing them grab heavy bolters, an extra toughness won't be a big change.

>>93192924
They still have fuel in em, based on the jet engine part of the description

>>93192938
>Nah they're just bikes
it says they are basically tiny jet aircraft. if anything jetbikes should auto explode and suffer from crash and burn rules.

jetbikes should be t4, 1W and 4+ armor. with auto explode like dreads.

>>93192924
A fan, duh!

>>93192948
You're right anon. Marines should also explode on death because they have a miniature nuclear reactor in their backpacks too. And while we're at it, all lasweapons should have blind because they're firing light at you, and bolters should have a 3" blast vs anyone with a 5+ save.

>>93192973
Never thought of it that way, you've opened my eyes anon

>>93192977
>>93192973
I mean....technically speaking, technically speaking mind you, you are not wrong, it IS a fan that is moving them, its just a really really fast fan, thats pushing out ignited fuel. But TECHNICALLY it is a fan.

>>93192975
That sounds perfectly reasonable to me

>>93192948
Nah that's a bit silly

>>93192975
yes.

>>93192984
>pushing out ignited fuel
Doesn't have to. Can just be an electric fan, powered by an atomantic reactor.

>>93193020
>atomantic reactor.
so even more explosive

>>93192065
Beyond this mephiston red primer, I have not decided whether khorne red (more purple) or word bearers red (more brownish). I've found the latter looks better on vehicles so maybe that
>>93192325
Yeah 3D print. I wish to run units that GW is unable to provide

>bring my RG to fight solar aux
>Turn 3, nearly all of their units are gone, tanks were done for by turn 2
What the fuck you guys were not kidding

>>93193118
Yea. RG have OP rules

>>93193125
Huh?

>>93190194
Wish me luck lads going to try out my Sorcerer cabal deathstar tonight ill let you know how it goes. I figure shitting out 24 Deflagrate rending 4 shots should do something.

>>93193148
YEAHHH best of luck, please let us know how it goes

>>93193118
yea. 2.0 was written by a drooling retard named john french.

>>93193155
Its either gonna be hilariously good, or hilariously bad IDK.
Either way, its magic man time.

>>93193166
I wrote up a list inspired by your strat but made the esoterists in power armor and the praetor replaced with amon, I wish you the best fellow tsons anon

>>93192864
>dreads swing at I4
Isn't the comment chain you're responding to talking about ranged Brutal, found on artillery and big guns like the Vindicator?
Though it is indeed for an invented problem: the transition of Dreads from Vehicle to Dread type. But it couldn't remain a vehicle

>>93193219
No its brutal in general no one gives a shit about ranged brutal because its so hard and niche to get.
You got vindicators which are small blast and fragile as fuck.
And The typhon, which is a LOW
Then what artillery? Is there even anything thats got brutal, AP2 and is an artillery piece?

>>93193219
I'm fine with them becoming monstrous creatures. What wasn't cool was doubling their wound count for no reason
>But toughness is easier to wound
It was in most cases, -1 to the dice roll needed to glance vs to wound. In exchange they got
>No weapon destroyed/stunned/immobilized
>no getting one shot by explodes
>don't have to worry about moving max speed
They didn't need an effective wound increase.

>>93193337
Dreadnoughts are fine, stop being a bitch.

>>93193351
>Dreadnoughts are fine
contemptors are undercosted by like 50 points and their multi meltas should be like 20 points each

>>93193420
>undercosted by like 50 points and
I dunno about that.
>their multi meltas should be like 20 points each
Absolutely agree here. Only 5 points for a multimelta is way too little.

>>93193420
>>93193451
The problem is that the only way to effectively deal with a Dreadnought is AP2 Brutal weapons, and if in melee also be WS5+ and at initiative so they don'tget pummeled into oblivion before swinging. This means that pretty much the only way to deal with a Dreadnought is...another Dreadnought. They need to go down to WS4 and BS4 3+ save, or they will continue to be absurdly tough and effective for how cheap they are.

>>93193585
no its not, you just need rending, thats how you deal with them. High volume of rending forcing an SV5

>>93190194
> TQ
An FAQ.

Question, can a Forgelord fix allied vehicles, for instance if i bring a Knight as a LoW in a WS army, can the Forgelord also repair the Knight. I intended to run one on a bike

File: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK.gif (639 KB, 941x684)

639 KB GIF

>Want to look at some models
>Forgot the siggy box drops this weekend
>Get put in a queue for 20 mins
Sigmar delenda est

>>93193647
No need for an FAQ, no unless you're sworn brothers with mechanicum. Fellow warriors and below can't be affected by friendly abilities, including battlesmith.

>>93193280
>Is there even anything thats got brutal, AP2 and is an artillery piece?
The chain is indeed about Vindicators becoming AP2, which would make them easily accessible AP2 Instant Death Brutal 3.
So indeed idk if that should be. Though I'd be more worried about the fairness of it than I'd be about Terminators, since only so many termies can fit below their 3" small blasts.
So maybe AP2 Demolishers are fine. They are 24" after all.
It's not like Solar Auxilia armed with AP2 demolishers suddenly makes it so that Astartes aren't armed with massed lascannons and stuff
>>93193337
>In exchange they got
>>No weapon destroyed/stunned/immobilized
Though now they are vulnerable to stuff vehicles aren't, like Fleshbane. Or Brutal...hmm..
Idk I think there's a place for Brutal. I guess.
>>no getting one shot by explodes
Though now they can get blinded, concussed and so on
>>don't have to worry about moving max speed
Do remember there are some double gun dreads that care little about moving.

Idk. Are you saying that, if Dreads had not doubled their wounds, you'd be able to remove Brutal from the game?

>>93190194
I'm not waiting, because I expect nothing from GW.
It isn't that the developpers are absolute shit at the job, it's that they don't get enough time to work on projects.
The hype train runs GW.

So HH is just a slightly updated version of v7.
Where anything that has AP3 is decent, anything less is absolutely useless tax.
It doesn't surprise me that suddenly everyone is running all the dreadnoughts, because even in a casual setting most people still want to use decent toys.

Now if vehicles had the same rules as dreadnoughts (toughness and wounds)
If the shit-tier ap system was replaced by save modifiers.
If space marines were used as the archetype of "the best warriors in the galaxy" and not just bolter pigs...

What I would have liked would have been a redevelopment of rogue trader era, because just like the models are re-imagined ld school stuff, the rules could be too.

>>93191543
I'm playing an subterranean assault list at ab event next month, and I'm kind of worried intercept will just destroy me. Pop the drills as they come in, and then you're mopping up before I can even act, while down 1/4 of my list, at least by points.
I'm not the most competitive as long as I have fun, but it does worry me a bit.

>>93193938
I'm none of the earlier anons, but just wanted to chip in and say that I think Vindicators (specifically, their Demolisher cannons) are for the most part fine as is, but I feel like they ought to have Wrecker or something... and for that matter, the Typhon could use a bit of love in that respect as well. There's really no shortage of ways to kill Terminators (melta, plasma, lascannons, AP2 melee weapons, etc, etc), but a lot of these weapons actually fall short against Dreadnoughts quite badly.

>>93194029
If you pop up anywhere within LOS of a HSS you are gonna get lit the fuck up, and if its rocking Las canons, your gonna get shredded.

>>93194033
DESU dreads first of all need to lose that 5++. or they gotta lose the SV2, one of the two, along with removal of immune to ID. Because im fucking sorry if you are getting shot at by a god damn STR 14 weapon, im sorry your dread should be getting fucking cleaned off teh table in a single shot. Str 14 weapons are Lace weapons. You are going to tell me a dread can just tank a Lance canon hit to the face, a weapon designed to deal with titans? nah fuck that.

>>93193938
>Idk. Are you saying that, if Dreads had not doubled their wounds, you'd be able to remove Brutal from the game?
Yes. The major things with 2+ wounds in the game are characters, veteran equivalent models (T4 2W 3+), terminator equivalent (T4 2W 2+/5++), ogryn equivalent (T5 3W 4+), mini walker equivalent (T6 4W 3+), Dreadnought equivalent (T7, W6, 2+/5++), and monstrous creature equivalent (T8, W7, 2+/5++). Of these, veterans and Terminators are very vulnerable to instant death, ogryns are pretty hard to kill but there are still ways to splat them, mini walkers are dead hard and need proper anti tank weapons, and dreadnoughts+ are just silly. Cap them out at 5W max, redistributing mini walkers to T6 3W 3+, dresdnoughts to T7 4W 3+/5++, and MCs to T8 5W 2+/5++ and you can keep them in the range of needs anti weapons but still killable without Brutal.

>>93194033
If it's going to have wrecker (enabling it to explode vehicles) and a small blast, then I wouldn't have too much problem with it being full AP2.
Like, it's a small blast. How many models will it affect, really?

>>93192834
I like the idea of the WS table, I don't like that my veterans are better in melee than my legion specific terminators.

>>93194169
Unsure. Indeed they are full of wounds, but it's also true that many guns were over nerfed.
If plasma got its AP2 back, if Demolishers got their AP2, if artillery got its teeth back and so on, maybe that would balance the stats out.

>>93194339
I see two options
A) Restore old WS table, make Terminators WS5
B) Make Veterans and most Legion terminator units WS4, basically make it so only retinue squads can get WS5.

>>93194374
You walk a fine line though, because if you give it to much teeth, we are right back into the joy that was HH1.0 parking lots lobbing shells across the board.
There is a reason why in 1.0 i always allied in Solar Aux detachment that brought 3 basilisks with me.

heralds should be +50 points

>>93194122
That's what I figured. I was thinking my 2 options were arrive behind LoS and drive up before disembarking, if I can manage it, or arrive right on them and make them risk the explosion taking out their own guys (ideally with the drill full of tacs, but could be a bold play for the interemptors).

>>93191833
Making blackshields with a cream base and using skeleton horde because it naturally has a disgusting filthy look to it and works well over warm color undercoats because its so thin its almost a shade

Power sword on my cata sarge is a bad idea isn't it?

I just like power swords.

>>93194993
yes but hes only ws4 anyway so who cares hes going to be bullying mooks anyway

>>93194993
What legion?

The space marine characters being repeatedly and genuinely shocked at the thoughts of space marines fighting other space marines and of post-compliance worlds rebelling against the imperium throughout the first couple of HH novels seems weird and forced, especially the latter bit since there's tons of examples of anti-imperial rebellions from before the Heresy

>>93195056
Alpha Legion

>>93191833
4 tacs nothing fun but it's honest work.

>>93192360
Cute lil bunny, all he needs is a head pat.

>>93195427
Give him a power dagger bro, you like daggers right?

>>93195316
I think its less the idea and more the scale of it, the idea of legions with equivalent near-peer supply lines destroying each other on an industrial scale instead of one-offs of some fucked up lost legion or prospero situation where they’re being isolated and culled by a fleet of specialists and overwhelming firepower.

>>93195316
Well they were all a cohesive force of battle bros before that united in the glory of conquering and uniting the galaxy so you just don't get it... space marines are supposed to be better then mere mortal humans rebelling, hubris yes but still.

>>93193616
The problem with that is it costs way more to buy anything to kill a contemptor than it does to just buy a contemptor. The contemptor (and boxnaut to a lesser degree) is so inexpensive that there’s just no option to kill it within its cost besides another dread. They either need a point cost increase, or, my preferred option, a move to 3+ armour save. Doing that makes them vulnerable to being overwhelmed by lighter fire power, but keeps them highly durable with their number of wounds and mobility. It also means brutal isn’t as important, so it works nicely with removing brutal from thunder hammers. The game has too much 2+ anyways.

File: lies.png (896 KB, 1280x720)

896 KB PNG

>>93190194
>TQ
Stopped waiting and bought a printer.

File: 1714689234364518.png (395 KB, 466x698)

395 KB PNG

>>93195741
Based. Hope and waiting brings nothing, taking action does.

File: IMG_7161.jpg (3.9 MB, 3024x4032)

3.9 MB JPG

>>93191833
when i get this paycheck from my seasonal job(phantom fireworks warehouse) im gonna spend it on some recast BA special units, and tank models to convert into tanks for my imperialis militia project. I got a lot of good critique on my very orky looking malcador a few threads ago, and recommendations for some very good tools, so I'm hopefully gonna make a better effort of it.
Right now I'm considering taking another 1/35 tamiya M41(as its dimensions match a malcador perfectly) and reversing the turret to make a semi-turreted gravis lasgun setup. I liked where the demolisher was last time (pic rel) but another anon said the angle was screwy

>>93196044
>that scratch build
Major kudos for scratch building, but that thing needs a lot of work to look passable as anything besides an ork wagon. You might to look into mitre cutters or rolling cutters for plasticard, as the lines are so rough that it ruins anything you’re going for. The hull needs some modification before it’ll resemble a malcador (or even just to get that front demolisher cannon to an angle that looks like the breach of the gun could actually fit inside the hull. You should take the front plate of the turret off and straighten out the liens on it, and then try to set the side mounted guns onto a cylinder so they can sit higher and not just stick straight out sideways.

I really, really don’t want to discourage you from scratch building, but this thing looks really bad.

Other suggestions I can make are to invest in a sharper knife - you can get utility knives that take the trapezoidal blades and then get carbide edged blades for those and that might help, but just learning how to work with plasticard could really help a lot too. For thicker pieces you kind of need to whittle the lines to get them straight unless you have a cutting setup with guides. A fine razor saw could help with the larger cuts too.

As for connecting pieces together, try to think about how plates on vehicles fit together in real life. Thin welds made out of heated and stretched sprue or carved with modeling putty can be a life saver for gap filling while still looking right. Post more picture from more angles though - I think with some more practice and planning you could have some really cool stuff.

File: EmpChildrenFocus-Mar23-Ha(...).jpg (139 KB, 1000x1000)

139 KB JPG

I bought one of the pic related guns for my veteran's assault cannon. Should I make it belt or magazine fed? I figure making the drum be on the side of the gun should be easy enough and it's not like ass-tarts need to worry about weight.

>>93195685
Mostly I'm just trying to build my kits with minimal pain. Plus I like swords more than any other weapon as a general concept. I think swords are cool.

>>93196139
like i said, it was orky shit. I've got a "cutter 3" from northwest railways to cut straighter because no matter what I cant seem to get a straight cut on my own.
>it looks really really bad
yeah i know. first effort with green stuff and styrene.
im not gonna post more angles admittedly cause its really rough.
>the breach of the gun could actually fit inside the hull
now I get why it looks screwy. I'm trying to figure out how that would work or could attach it, but the only thing im coming up with is making a half square and attaching it to the hull.
>set the side mounted guns onto a cylinder so they can sit higher
admittedly I'm not sure what you mean by this. do you have any images that could explain this? I have trouble visualizing.
>the hull needs some modification to look like a malcador
admittedly im not looking to do anything picture perfect for a malcador- my philosophy, especially for imperialis militia is that each unit can mean a variety of different things for every planet. Granted, the goal is to be within similar size as the base model, but I'm not too concerned with looking exactly like the base model.

A brutal weapon only does one wound right, you just have to make multiple saves for that wound?

>>93196375
"When a model is allocated a Wound inflicted by a weapon with this special rule, it does not suffer only one Wound but instead a number of Wounds equal to the number in brackets associated with the specific variant of this special rule, with all of the Wounds inflicted using the same AP and special rules as that of the initial Wound. Roll to save against each Wound inflicted separately, but note that Wounds do not spill over to other models and are lost. This special rule has no effect on models that do not have a Toughness value."

File: cyanide.jpg (98 KB, 504x470)

98 KB JPG

>>93196408
Now tell me why I am so blind, Anon. Shall I put my eyes out if I won't bother to see with them?

>>93196420
We all make mistakes

>>93196426
I think I might be getting too used to making those

>>93196432
It is what it is

>>93196434
Yeah well it sucks

>>93196246
Okay, to start right off: buy yourself some knives or chisels. A good hobby knife is cheap and will make a world of difference for finishing. Despite being cheap, I really like X-acto’s #1 precision knife. If you’re doing plasticard work you will end up going through a lot of blades, so I’d pick up a couple packs of replacements. You can get a huge variety of shapes and sizes, but I find a curved blade or a chisel blade works best for plasticard. For bigger cuts, get a utility knife or box cutter. You can go with the breakaway blade ones, but I much prefer ones that use the trapezoidal blades. Dewalt makes carbide edged ones that you can get at Home Depot or online, but I know for a fact that you can get this type of knife with regular blades at hardware stores on at least four continents.

I’d really need to see a picture of the sides to give more advice, but the side guns look like they’re just stuck onto the hull. They stick out in an awkward way and look too short and too long to feel real. The muzzle end of them also looks the wrong size for how short the barrel is, especially when your monstrous main gun has no muzzle device at all. Regarding the cylinder thing, look up the sponsons for the MkIIb land raider, that’s what I’m thinking, but shortened down to maybe half that heigh. The side guns look like tubes stuck on to the outside of the rest of the tank, not like guns that are meant to be there.

The hull issue is really that you have a giant monster construct with lots of hard flat edges stuck onto a very short, streamlined, lightweight looking hull and there’s this big contrast in design. It would be like a dump truck with racing car spoilers on the back, or a punch buggy with an armoured car top.

>>93196375
1. Attacker rolls to hit.

2. Attacker rolls to wound vs. average toughness.

3. Defender allocates wounds to models of his choosing (unless the attacker has a special rule like precision strikes, then the attacker gets to allocate the wounds to his choice of models).

4. Each allocated wound then becomes (x) number of wounds, so each model with a wound allocated to it therefore has to make (x) number of saving throws.

5. Defender rolls saving throws (armor saves or invulnerable saves) (and can also roll damage mitigation FNP etc. if applicable). If the model dies before completing all the (x) saves, these additional unsaved wounds (failed armor saves) generated by Brutal (x) don't spill over to other models (think of it like the model gets overkilled, completely pulped, flattened, exploded etc.). Once the model is dead however, any leftover unsaved wounds (failed wound rolls, those rolled in step 2) do get allocated to other models (and they in turn get converted into Brutal (x) number of required armor saves).

>>93196462
>hull issue
admittedly it was meant to look like a self propelled gun, or one of the early tnak hunters like the marder but it just came out...awful.
as for the blades I've got a handful, and I cut by dragging it across a ruler but no matter what I always seem to get uneven, terrible shapes. hence the use of the cutter(which does long, straight cuts)
>MKIIIB land raider
now I get what you're saying. yeah, they're pretty much stuck out on the side with little side attachments meant to look like bolted on gun carriers. it was the worst part of the build.

File: imagen_2024-06-29_003440326.png (893 KB, 1783x844)

893 KB PNG

>>93194392
>A) Restore old WS table
The current WS chart is "WS5-or-nothing", but the previous one wasn't okay either; hence it got changed. No 2s, no 6s. Only 3-4-5.
Revise the WS chart so it is more natural, and a difference of +1WS is one side having better rolls, instead of one side having better rolls AND the other side having worse rolls, which would be a two-stage difference

File: IMG_0106.jpg (407 KB, 1193x1141)

407 KB JPG

Test model for my Blackshields - I want to lean into the Rogue Trader aesthetic with lots of slogans and kill markings and random heraldry on my Beakies, but I also don’t want to slap a complete acid tripping clusterfuck down on the table considering 30k is more narrative. I’m not sure if I’ve hit the right balance yet, maybe something on the arms or helmet?

>>93194339
stop using your Legion specific terminators the wrong way then you Nostroman fuckpig

File: Joker 2.gif (2.31 MB, 320x180)

2.31 MB GIF

>>93196809
>Uses melee terminators to melee
>"Wrong"
Society :^)

>>93196762
>Helmet suggestions
Crosshair on the forehead
Card suite as a squad identifier on side or forehead of helmet (heart/spade/club/diamond etc.)
Beak painted metallic colour
Skull motif on helmet
Checkered stripe down the middle
>Arm suggestions
Spider web pattern
Flame pattern originating from the wrist/gauntlet
Stripe pattern similar to shoulderpad but with different colours down right arm
Checker pattern elbow plate or forearm

Regardless of what you choose, I like the idea anon. Just make sure not to overdo it too much. Admittedly I’m not too huge on your colour choice for the shoulder pad but pay me no mind

Does anybody have a working link with the black library books ?

>>93196762
YAAASSSSSSS QWEEN SLAYYYYY!

>>93190909
Weren’t they the meatgrinder legion?
The tacticals being mindless automatons marching forwards makes perfect sense.
They were definetly not ”one of the most tactical legions”.

File: More bullets, mi'lord.jpg (302 KB, 800x944)

302 KB JPG

>>93196172
>Should I make it belt or magazine fed?
Majick fed.

>>93196762
>>93197247
You left out the pink stripes of the pad, he's a stunning and brave trans-human.

>>93196762
Btw suggestion, add the small shields from catapractii kit on shoulder pads and paint them in funky colors.

>>93197247
>The marine >>93196762 even has the right legs for the SLAYYYY pose
Tried shoooping the arms but too tired rn to pull it off lmao

>>93197365
You're right that pose is very feminine with the cat walk stride

>>93197365
>>93197381
>"I'm just a sweet transhuman"

File: leak.jpg (44 KB, 326x314)

44 KB JPG

Heads up bros, the salamander box with the melee upgrades has been leaked.

>>93197564
thats just the resin upgrade set

>>93197564
Well, post it then. That's just the axe from the resin melee upgrade kit.

>>93191538
You take an actual line from one model to another(measuring base centre-to-centre iirc), and if it connects they can shoot. There are two types of cover, ruins/debris/foliage/etc you can see over(defined at the start of the game) and area terrain(same); it works by majority, if you draw your line and it passes through the former for more models than it doesn't, they get a cover save; if they're in area terrain within 6" of the defined edge you can shoot and they get cover, if they're more than 6" from the edge between you you can't shoot them at all. If more models can be "seen" outside of cover than in, the unit gets no cover save at all. Also, only models you can "see" and models that can "see" an enemy can shoot, so positioning actually mattered as a canny enemy could position their models such that the only part of your unit they could see are the ones he wanted dead thus forcing you to remove those specific models as casualties rather than choosing whatever you wanted as you otherwise could.

>>93191833
Working on some Templar brethren and hating painting all the armour details I chose to paint silver

>>93197564
>>93197576
>>93197584
Thts also not a new pic, its from Exemplary Battles volume 1

File: zIyspYd7pcldz7n1.png (600 KB, 1000x839)

600 KB PNG

Now that Sugmar has had it's regularly scheduled flop, the Mechanicum box can't be too far away right?

File: Immortal machine.jpg (151 KB, 1085x1080)

151 KB JPG

>>93197843
Blows my mind that GW aced the plastic Mechanicum after the ugly SA redesigns.

File: nothing of value lost.jpg (13 KB, 284x177)

13 KB JPG

>>93197899
>ugly SA redesigns

>>93192340
>anon doesn't know that huge numbers of people exclusively play HH with sub-1500pt ZM armies
Big battles always belonged in Epic, and people cramming 300 models a side onto a standard gaming board were always retards.

>>93192361
And who do you think those were written by and for? 3rd/4th Chads. Imperial Armour is what was left of Real GW after the suits took over completely in 5th, the modern Specialist Studio is what's left over of the non-batshit elements of Corpo GW before the wokies took over in AoS.

>>93197899
Idk. I'm not sold on thos helmets
And the thralls looks a lot like AoS rejected zombies...

>>93197899
I still can't believe how badly they've fucked marines in a marine based game.

>>93197966
It makes perfect sense. Designers and product managers trying to leave their mark and get a bonus target the top products of a company, while the rest is done by the B team.
The B team may just do an unimaginative but sensible upgrade, or be the real nerds that truly care about the product above their careers.

For another example look at Star Wars, compare Rogue One/Andor with the Sequel Trilogy

Are hazard stripes overdone on Iron Warriors? Would an army be better with sparse chevrons rather than being plastered everywhere?

>>93197843
remember that The Old World has been due Dwarfs since March and there's still Necromunda all of which should precede mechanicum so that fills at least one month of preorders without something 40k such as the rumoured BA. I think we'd be lucky to see mechanicum before August.

File: 1679510070401935.png (4.09 MB, 3000x3045)

4.09 MB PNG

Blackshield warband idea
>Legion company during great crusade liberate's a particular planet from xenos control
>Spend an amount of time building up the planet so that it's imperium worthy, most marines become sentimental about the planet and it's people to an extent
>Heresy hits and the company is garrisioned at the planet when it's attacked by an opposing force
>Opposing side is killing civies and militiamen without any care, just trying to eliminate whatever moves
>Friendly reinforcements arrive but also proceed to just kill civies from a mixture of collateral damage and "not knowing who's a baddie and who's a goodie"
>By the end of the battle, the planet is in cinders with all of it's people butchered for no justifiable reason other than to bleed an enemy who could easily recover regardless of the result
>Legion company is enraged by this; both sides don't care about whoever is caught in the middle, and decide they have no place in this war
>Scorch off their livery and take up the discarded weapons used by the human populace littering the planet
>Hitchhike around the galaxy, intercepting traitor and loyalist comms and attempting to arrive to battlefields and planets with civilian activity in attempts to defend the common people from being slaughtered
>When not defending civilians, they're just resuming great crusade activities, seeking out xenos to kill to expand humanity's border
Cringe or interesting? Was thinking traits wise the combo of Weapons of Desperation and In Disgrace All Are Equal would be the best way to represent a force like this, either that or replacing IDAAE with Only In Death Does Duty End

>>93198093
That's like saying tha blue is overdone for Ultras.
IW without hazard stripes are no IW

>>93197908
The plastic veletaris are trash

>>93198093
IW color scheme without chevrons is pretty fucking boring
Even more so if you are not using mk3

>>93198083
the closest parallel to games workshop is activision blizzard, it's scary how close the two are in outlook and history over the past decade or more. Whether it's public trading or career marketing is another story.

File: sadasdfagwe.jpg (32 KB, 350x222)

32 KB JPG

>>93198341
It's simple really. Either way, I'm starting to take a gander at Imperial Militia rules. Can't fuck up models that don't exist.

>>93190194
Damn, RIP the megas

File: refuse to elaborate.jpg (179 KB, 640x721)

179 KB JPG

>>93198533
>will it be the same ship
Yes.

>>93196726
Damn, I have this exact same chart drawn up too. Yours looks a lot better though.

>>93197661
Wait, is this not how it works anymore?

File: Screenshot_20240629_14451(...).jpg (131 KB, 720x599)

131 KB JPG

>>93197956
The helmets are optional, they have the classic heads in there too.

File: _07A6074x-01.jpg (36 KB, 600x900)

36 KB JPG

>>93198651
Can you put the heads on a marine body?

>>93197576
>>93197584
Oh god, it would be hilarious if the ‘melee upgrades’ are just the Despoiler resin weapons but in plastic.

>>93198093
No, the chevrons are an integral part of the colour scheme.
Why are you trying to get others to validate your own impulse to be lazy?

Leviathan melee arms would look sick on a deredeo dreadnought

>>93199043
They probably won't fit with how the dorito armor sticks out to the sides

>>93199043
Would they even be able to reach past the chest boat?

>>93198723
I can do it. I don't know whether (>you) can manage.

>>93199119
>I can do it.
Pics or no balls.

>>93198110
I like it, go for it anon, give us updates

Anyone got a working link for the mega?

>>93199447
YOU'LL GET YOUR MEGA WHEN YOU FIX THIS DAMN DOOR

>>93199447
fuck off. last time someone was spoonfed the megas were taken down within days.

>>93197661
Huh. I play with "you can't shoot trough ruins unless the enemy is *inside* the ruins". But that Centre to Centre rule is also nice

I feel like the special and heavy weapons don't fit the MK3 bodies as well as advertised.

>>93199680
How so? Feels are for women btw

File: expensive kitbash idea.jpg (1.56 MB, 3932x2000)

1.56 MB JPG

I just had an expensive idea for a legions imperialis moving city/capitol imperialis

Mixing the 40k baneblade kit with the legions imperialis kit to make some sort of moving cathederal/city tank sort of deal

I think it should cost about 500 euro to make, so that or the The Mighty Warbreaker from battlebling

>>93191523
>>93197661
TLoS ruined forests and woods in the game and for that alone should be flogged and run through the streets.

I want my green boards back. Not every battle is fought in Detroit.

File: images (3) (16).jpg (31 KB, 554x554)

31 KB JPG

>>93198533
>Ship of Thesseus
Assign a value to every one of the ship's components. Then, when going over a certain threshold, it is no longer the same ship
Example: I replace a Ferrari's engine with a Toyota's. Can I say it's still a Ferrari? Fuck no.
Thesseus is a hack defeated the same way you defeat Zeno's paradoxes: by learning how to count. If you can be defeated by count von Count you aren't really a philospher

>>93200062
>Example: I replace a Ferrari's engine with a Toyota's. Can I say it's still a Ferrari? Fuck no.
Anon the whole fucking point is that you are replacing the Ferrari's engine with the same engine but newer

>>93200062
>assign a value to every one of the ships components
value relative to what?
>then, when going over a certain threshold
what threshold, and how do you decide when it has been exceeded?
>can I replace a Ferrari's engine witha Toyota's and call it a Ferrari
not the same analogy as the ships, since the parts are replaced by new parts matching the originals' in order to allow the ship to fulfil the same function.
>counting beats Thesseus and Zeno's paradoxes
not really, you are changing the nature of the paradox so that it can be addressed by counting, rather than addressing the original proposition. This is actually one of the core issues with mathematics in science also.

>>93200062
But how many grains of sand does it take to make a heap?

This isn't spoonfed, the one for the HH novels is just ded. The others work through the process I've been told previously is how it's done.

File: 420689303_309445545016887(...).jpg (65 KB, 1080x1080)

65 KB JPG

Do you think this would be a good red for Word Bearers? I want a dark red that avoids going brown, and this seems to fit.

>>93200260
Three if arranged properly. A small heap, but a heap nonetheless.

>>93200062
It's not the same ship once you replace anything, but it's still Theseus' Ship so long as he is alive and up to the point of the first replacement after his death, at which point it becomes the Ship of Theseus. Once all the parts of Theseus' Ship have been replaced the Ship of Theseus also becomes a replica of Theseus' Ship.

File: imagen_2024-06-29_113910306.png (1.32 MB, 576x3431)

1.32 MB PNG

>>93200142
>You are replacing same with same
"No man ever steps in the same river twice. For it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man."
You still have *a* Ferrari. But after passing the threshold, it is not the same Ferrari you started out with.
>>93200190
>value relative to what?
Relative to a 100. Or whatever number you decide to represent "completeness".
>what threshold
50%
>and how do you decide when it has been exceeded?
It is exceeded when it goes over 50%, but the real issue would actually be the Asignation of Value. "Who decides what is worth what", which varies for case to case.
This is a simplified example, and the reasoning was the answer to "what defines a Ferrari?"
A: The shape (given by the surface pieces) and the engine.
So the totallity of the visible pieces (doors, hull panels, etc) are 50%, and the engine is the other 50%
In this simplified example note we have given 0% value to unseen pieces like wires, electronics, fluids, transmission and so on. This is because we don't notice that. A BETTER OBSERVER WOULD NOTICE, and thus assign value to those pieces (but a value would STILL be assigned).
For simplicity, in this example, we simply have not. Meaning you could replace all of that and "it would still be the same Ferrari".
>not the same analogy as the ships, since the parts are replaced by new parts matching the originals' in order to allow the ship to fulfil the same function.
"Matching" is not the same as "sameness"
>not really, you are changing the nature of the paradox so that it can be addressed by counting, rather than addressing the original proposition. This is actually one of the core issues with mathematics in science also.
I am simply following that replacing a bit is not a repair; it's substitution. A broken wooden board is repaired if it is glued/nailed back together, but it is replaced by a new board then it's been substituted, even if the new piece is "of the same kind". And we can indeed count this.

>>93200363
>A broken wooden board is repaired if it is glued/nailed back together,
But now you're adding glue/nails into the product, replacing the wood that was originally there.

>>93200260
First you have to define what "a heap of sand" is.
>A heap of sand is a group of grains of sand that is separate from any others
2 grains of sand, because 2 is a plural
>A heap of sand is a group of grains of sand that is separate from any others, and can mantain a pyramidal shape without help under the local weather conditions
5. You cannot have heaps in zero gravity.
>A heap of sand is a group of grains of sand, undefined by its shape, defined solely by the quantity
6.02214076×10^23 grains of sand, as per the definition of a mole (unit). This value is chosen based on the amount of substance that corresponds to the number of atoms in 12 grams of Carbon 12, numerically equal to the average particle mass of the compound expressed in daltons.
This makes the casually assumed "heap" be actually "nanoheaps", just like grams are but parts of a kilogram
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(unit)

>>93200413
No. Since adding is not an issue, it is actually still Theseus' ship, plus some glue. You lost nothing, and gained some.
The Horus Heresy

>>93198646
I don't know about nu40K I stopped playing seriously in 6th and I've never touched 8th+, but in 5th it switched to "true line of sight" and afaik it stayed that way ever since, you're supposed to hunch down and take a "model's eye view" from behind its head, if you can see any part of the enemy model you can shoot it, and if you can see it but any part of it is obscured by terrain it's in cover. Area terrain(and its associated size categories I forgot to mention - basically you couldn't hide stuff like Dreads and Carnifexes in tall grass or whatever) isn't a thing anymore, and positioning no longer matters beyond making sure the majority of the unit is unseen or in cover since the defending player can always remove whatever figures they want even ones the shooting unit couldn't possibly see.

It sounds like a subtle change but it really changed the way the game played and made it less tactical, and let's be honest 40K wasn't all that tactical to begin with so every bit it lost over the years was a big blow.

>>93200312
Yeah, that looks pretty nice.

>>93200062
Assigning values is changing the premise, and so cannot be used to claim the premise is invalid. The whole point of the conundrum is to prompt the reader to think about what a thing really is and whether the object itself can, is, or should be different from the philosophical conception of it, and whether that should matter. You don't "defeat" philosophy with maths you dipshit.

The implication is that meaning is imbued into the concept by a combination of purpose and continuity; it remains *that* ship because there';s an unbroken chain of continuity and purpose between whatever version exists at its inception and at whatever later point you examine it, and that's what distinguishes THE Ship of Theseus from a replica - even though both may *appear* identical and neither may contain even a single original physical component, only one is the result of the process begun by those original components.

File: IMG_20240629_190531.jpg (848 KB, 1815x1856)

848 KB JPG

Working on an engineering/recovery titan

>email GW asking them about the melee weapons
>they thumb their nose at me and tell me to piss up a rope
Not quite what I was expecting, to be honest.

>>93200312
It leans a little dark and purple but depending on your basing and how you highlight/weather it could work

File: Warhammer-40000-фэндомы-I(...).jpg (321 KB, 1023x740)

321 KB JPG

>>93200637
Where Navy titan power lifter?

File: imagen_2024-06-29_121523239.png (482 KB, 504x2948)

482 KB PNG

>>93200613
>Assigning values is changing the premise
It is a wrong premise, to begin with. And indeed the first step to resolving every problem ever is to measure. So not only "you can't just measure" is wrong; measuring is a necessity.
The ship does not remain the same when you replace anything, and the ship of Thesseus does not remain Thesseus' when over 50% of it has been replaced.
Easier example is George Washington's original axe. It ceased to be George Washington's when the axehead was replaced. In fact it is the axehead what makes most of the % of what George Washington's Axe is, as many tools have shafts, but only axes have axeheads, and only that axehead was Washington's.