I think people read it wrong. Damage table is rolled AFTER the penetration roll, right?
So you still glance with S 8 but get -3 for the effect.
I think people read it wrong. Damage table is rolled AFTER the penetration roll, right?
So you still glance with S 8 but get -3 for the effect.
DͭͭE̲̪͛́A̧̪̗̝ͨ̂̄̆̎T̐̐͒͒̄̄҉̣̝͈ͅH͕͇̪̱̋̑ͣ̎̐ͬ ̧̝T̥̖͌Ơ͋͋̔ ̬͓̘̦̼̟̑̇̔͌ͮ͋̏Ṭ̷͇̙̻̳̪͕ͣ̑H̸͈ͦ̂̐͂͆ͪ̈́E̢̿̄͊̾͆͆ͪ ̵̈́̉͒E̺̤̿̈ͤͮ̌̉͜N͐̃ͦ̅̕E̷͇̗̜̔ͮͤ̽M̴̥̃I̳͑͐̌͘E̫̒́S̡̤̰̯͚̐ͯ̐ͤ
͖̐͒ͩ̊͆́̚O̝ͪ͗ͬͬͮͧF̫̪̗̘͕̎̒ͪͩ͋ͅ ̣͔̔́ͦͮT͋H̺͎̫͕̖̐͟Ê̓͏̳͕͇̫̭̝̻ ̓̍̓̍̓ͯ͗́F̙̭͙̪͇̤̲̉͑͒̓̈́͒A͊̑ͥ̆̀L̴͚͉͇̞̼̗̑ͧ͒̒S͔̺̘̟̻̬ͦ͐ͩ͛Ě̯̠̹̕ ̹̮̊̈̆̓ͬͅÉ͖̟̙̮M̀Pͭ̉́̑͐̑̏E̹̬̹̭̋̌̇́R͕̣̦͎̽ͮ͗̿ͮ̏͌͢O̘̬̩̘͍R̪ͮͣ
My Broadsides still look at it and shrug. Being immune to the lance and melta rules does make it seem a bit overpowered. Ordanance, Railguns, MCs and high strength CC attacks are really all that have a good chance of killing it, meltas are now basically useless, lances don't tend to wander above 8-9 either, mass lascannons are far too expensive...
From what I can see, it meltas everything that dares to get close and shells the rest of the stuff to buggery.
Wins:7/Draws: 2/Losses: 3
Wins:5/Draws: 1/Losses: 0
Well, the name fits.
Might be getting one, since I like the model (like I love Land Raiders in general). Might have to make less extreme rules for it though.
Mmmm I want one of those Land Raiders. And have it looted by Orks. And have snotlings and shit crawling all over it with banners declaring "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH".
Wow, this MK IV Ironclad is definitely the most high-tech looking dreadnought that's been released. I would say a 'must-have' in an Iron Hands or Salamanders army. I don't know if I'll be able to resist getting it :/
The achilles is pretty nice, and dont forget ap1 cancels the -1 on the damage chart rule. Looks like zoans and broadsiades are the only reliable way to kill it.
Also, the armament isnt exactly scary for a 300pt tank. Gorgeous model, though,
Eldar in 5th Ed. A Tactica, by Xenith
"Give a man a match and he will be warm for a day. Set him on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life" - Terry Pratchett
"That logic wouldn't apply to Space Marines because they are not hollow." - CFoley
You forgot Medusa Bastion-Breachers (and possibly Vanquishers, though no AP1 will make getting a destroyed result difficult).
stick njal in it and have a couple of hunter saga wolf priests in some footslogging units nearby. Instant 3+ or 4+ cover saves everywhere. Pretty much all enemies within 24'' inches are nerfed by njal as well.
Couldn't you tank shock ppl into neat clusters before using machine spirit to use the thunderfire on it? Tremor shells + some other DT placement would limit the mob to d6'' movement next turn. That would be vunerable to a large amount of template damage. (espec with potentially 6 templates inside it to begin with)
I though what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes-The Laughing Man -J.D.Salinger
I'm going to kill this dog. I just haven't decided how.
The Achilles is the first thing I've seen that I will simply refuse to play against, at least outside of Apocalypse where Destroyer weapons can still take care of it. Otherwise, the thing is close to indestructible for many armies. The ability to ignore Melta and Lance is a pretty big "screw you" to a lot of armies. Those special rules are supposed to directly counter the fact that only the very strongest (and most expensive) of guns can get through AV 14. That only leaves S9 and S10 weapons (or the rare weapons with an additional D6 that don't use Melta rules), and those will still score Penetrations (or even Glances) less that half the time they roll. Chainfists, Melta Bombs, and Haywire Grenades are the best chances in close combat, but you might not even get there as the Achilles's Thunderfire Cannon can slow you to a crawl.
I could have made peace with the Melta/Lance thing. However, the universal -1 to damage rolls is just ridiculous, it should have been something like "do not add the +1 to damage from AP1." As it is, a normal penetrating hit from one of the few weapons that actually can penetrate its armor has only half the chance to destroy it outright, most hits will only cause Shaken or Stunned results. Incidentally, put Brother-Sergeant Chronus in it and it gets to ignore all those too! An AP1 weapon helps out somewhat, but merely puts the damn thing back to 'normal' durability. To have anything close to a reasonable chance to kill it you need a weapon with S10 (S9 really isn't good enough) that is also AP1 - many armies don't even have access to such a weapon, and some that do normally don't field it because other weapons are better in general circumstances.
I'm not sure if I should start another thread for this, but how does Forgeworld go around changing their rules for their own exclusive miniatures? So many of the PDFs are "experimental rules" only.
I think it's a given that a miniature with better rules is going to sell more, but at the same time the new Achilles Land Raider has the potential to be game-breaking. How receptive are they to fan feedback? You'd think that with the smaller amount of miniatures they make and sell, there'd be less of a problem with changing the rules if fans playing them have a real problem.
Stuff like the "Tau Drone Sentry Turrets" (an early model from the Imperial Armour Volume 3 book, the Taros Campaign) have weak armour and count as open-topped if they fire, but they might be better if they could gain some form of infiltration via a stealth generator or even something as simple as camo-netting. I think they would be a nice low-manpower-requirement for Kauyon-type strategies--lure the prey into a field of camouflaged or infiltrated Drone Turrets, which pop up and cut the prey to shreds with a volley of fire.
On the issue of the same book, the Heavy Gun Drones (essentially HS choices which shoot not much better than Fire Warriors and can carry only TL Burst Cannons or a Burst Cannon/Markerlight combo) might be much more attractive if they were allowed to join Fire Warrior squads as a form of assigning heavy weapons to those squads (since Fire Warriors can't handle those weapons by themselves). Drones can already carry Rail Rifles--it might be interesting to let them join FW squads with an Ion Cannon or the like, kind of like how Eldar Guardians can get weapon platforms.
I'm not sure of the entire process, but Forgeworld HAS changed rules for their models from time-to-time, usually coinciding with the release of a new edition. This is handled in the form of an update/reload or a new book that has the updated rules within it. It is then the responsibility of the gamer to provide the correct set of rules when they play.
Me - Dude! Don't eat that (habanero beef jerky), it's friggin' hot as f*ck!!!
Tim - Oh, it's not baaaaa...aaaaa....aaaa.....aaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!! It's like the devil p*ssed in my mouth!!!
My Necrons are looking at that Achilles and wondering what in the world they're good for anymore. I never use the Monolith and don't have my codex handy at the moment so I'm not sure, but if I'm reading that stuff right, the Achilles officially kicks the Monolith to the curb in the borderline invulnerability category. And pretty much every other category.
The Space Marines seriously need to be spanked, sat down, and reminded that there *are* other armies in the game.
The problem with that is that SMs are obviously the best-selling army of 40k; while I'm all for proper army balance, I take it giving the SMs the best toys are supposed to make the largest amount of players happy.The Space Marines seriously need to be spanked, sat down, and reminded that there *are* other armies in the game.
I think that you should also realize that your Monolith is also usable in standard games and tournaments, whether you choose to use it in your army list or not. As a Forgeworld model with Forgeworld rules, you're relegated to friendly games (so long as the opponent agrees) or Apocalypse games with it unless it states that you can use Forgeworld rules elsewhere. And once you go into Apocalypse or into the Forgeworld box of goodies, there is always something out there that can kill something else... usually plenty on either side.Originally Posted by Fading Echo
...the monolith is still the toughest unit in any codex. And it has a good weapon. that cannot be destroyed. and it can deepstrike. and it can transport troops. and it can help keep your troops alive.
Kweet yor vine-ing ;P
Anyway, FW space marine stuff has a larger pool of potential buyers, so makes sense. Why would the release a lot of necron stuff when hardly anyone plays them because of the old rules? Just wait till the new rules come out, then youll have your FW stuff.
Well then maybe they should make a new spin-off, "Warhammer 40k: Space Marinez", and then the rest of us can go back to having an actual balanced game.The problem with that is that SMs are obviously the best-selling army of 40k; while I'm all for proper army balance, I take it giving the SMs the best toys are supposed to make the largest amount of players happy.
So what are people calling the Jigaw being?
Im thinking its something for DKoK, namely from the wheels on that trailer. Maybe a Hellhound/ one of the new variations for it, but DK style?
The tracks are wrong for any Chimera variant. The trailer looks like it's attached to a Malcador chassis, rather than a Leman Russ, and is likely a fuel carrier, possibly for some large flamer variant - Flamestorm Cannon, maybe something even stronger.
That was my first thought as well, Rex. Superheavy flame weaponry on a Malcador chassis is my bet.
There is something else that confuses me about Forgeworld and its models. What's the process that decides whether or not a Forgeworld model becomes "mainstream"?
Several IG vehicles originally available only to Forgeworld miniatures have become "mainstream" and are now tourney-legal. The various exotic Leman Russ variants (such as the Vanquisher, Exterminator, and Executioner) used to be Forgeworld-only for instance. If those variants are now tourney-legal, why isn't the TL Lascannon-armed Leman Russ Annihilator too? It's nothing gamebreaking in my view.
The Forgeworld-only Rocket Launcher and Missile Launcher Sentinels also became mainstream when the new IG codex included Missile Launcher-armed Sentinels.
Were the aforementioned Forgeworld models included because the buyers who used them in games found that they didn't break the game and added variety that was appreciated/needed? I wonder what's next on the Forgeworld model list that will become tourney-legal . . .
I wonder what's next on the Forgeworld model list that will become tourney-legal . . .
Ask the codex writers.
Now that you mention it, i think your right. i took another look at the malcador and it looks very similar.The tracks are wrong for any Chimera variant. The trailer looks like it's attached to a Malcador chassis, rather than a Leman Russ, and is likely a fuel carrier, possibly for some large flamer variant - Flamestorm Cannon, maybe something even stronger.
I doubt it. While I am not privy to the GW playtesting process, something like that would be determined more by internal review and testing, not by customer feedback. However, I am sure that sales numbers and projections play a role in the decision making as well.Were the aforementioned Forgeworld models included because the buyers who used them in games found that they didn't break the game and added variety that was appreciated/needed?
There's also a matter of practicality. Something like the Hades Breaching Drill really has no place in the pitched firefight that a game of Warhammer 40k represents and will most likely never see mainstream production, but a light skimmer like the Piranha fills a valuable role in the Tau arsenal and made a lot of sense to greenlight for the codex.
I have to say that Aquila's comment is most likely more accurate. As to the Leman Russ Annihilator, well, why should I take a Leman Russ armed with a twin-linked Lascannon, when I can take a Russ armed with a Battle Cannon that is far more useful, or a Russ with a Vanquisher cannon that can more reliably kill armored vehicles.
I have a feeling it comes down to what is fun/useful, and what is not, in addition to sales numbers/projections.
Actually, thanks to the Twin-Linked Lascannon of the Leman Russ Annihilator, you get a 1/4 chance of missing, while at BS3 the Vanquisher has 1/2 a chance of missing (I've seen people complain on forums on how often Vanquishers miss), unless you take several Vanquishers (which could get expensive and are pigeonholed) or splurge on a special character for your tanks. Of course, Vanquisher AT shells do better on the Armour Penetration role against vehicles, but the TL Lascannon is better at hitting in the first place. I'm still at a loss as to why the LR Annihilator wasn't included, since it would have been a nice trade-off between "hits more often but does less AV damage" vs. "hits less often but does more AV damage."
I hope when the Tau codex gets its update the FW XV-9 Battlesuits become tourney-legal. Allowing the various FW weapon configurations for the Hammerhead Gunship to become tourney-legal would be another way to increase variation in a new Tau codex, given the success of the new Leman Russ variants.
And why stop there? Giving the Technical Drones the ability to act like the Tau equivalent of a medic could be nice way to make them tourney legal, or even allowing the currently-mediocre Heavy Gun Drones more weapon options and letting them act like "Heavy Weapon options" for Fire Warriors would be a great way for making them more useful.
I do have some comments on "Annihilator vs. Vanquisher", but I'll save them for the end of my post.
As regards to your hopes on the new Tau codex, I actually agree quite a bit; the new XV-9 battlesuits have awesome models and interesting rules (though they are a bit too specialized in terms of armaments, IMO), and having the FW turrets available to the Hammerhead would be awesome (especially that Fusion Cannon, which I wager would outperform the Railgun in a close-quarters environment, a la Cities of Death, or even DS'ing a Hammerhead w/ Fusion Cannons in a game of Planetstrike).
As to the Technical Drones, I think they'd fit more as a Techpriest/Techmarine equivalent, while TBH I really don't know what could be done with the Heavy Gun Drones.
As to the Russes, I personally would take a Vanquisher; especially using the Death Korps list, where you can get a coax gun, which would allow you to pretty much count the Vanquisher cannon as twin-linked if you get a hit with the coax gun. I can see where an Annihilator would be useful, but personally I'll take the Vanq every time.
XV9's are awesome looking but whoever named them did not do their homework. Having the Tau use a base-8 numeric system was an inspired design decision in the original codex. I am extremely disappointed in the lack of creativity in the latest Tau background and the Tau Empire codex (first digit denotes weight class!? pathetic!)
Whatever GW decides to promote to the official line, I hope they do it with a bit of care and forethought to both the rules and the background rather than just what looks cool.
If nothing else, I hope the next Tau codex update gives them access to Heavy Flamers. Even factions as "primitive" as the Orks have their Skorchas, and the Eldar still see enough use in the "primitive" weapon to use them--why not the Tau? It would certainly be another good way for units to fry assaulting troops who are getting too close with a template.
One thing that is preventing the Hammerhead from becoming the "Tau Leman Russ" in terms of being able to swap out a large variety of turret-mounted weapon systems is that the Railgun with its submunition shot is a little too good. Without the submunition shot (or if it were toned down, perhaps to the level of Chaos Havoc Launchers, or Frag Missiles, or even a blast-version of a Multilaser) the Long-barrelled Burst Cannons (which have the same Strength and AP of the railgun submunition shot, longer range, but no blast) become more viable, though adding rending to the cannons might make them more useful. The remaining weapons, like the Missile Pods and Plasma Cannons are too similar to the versions mounted on battlesuits--perhaps special rules for Hammerhead-mounted versions would be in order, much like how only Hammerhead-mounted railguns can use the submunition shot and the solid slug and the ones used by Battlesuits can only use the solid slug.
I still am confused as to why GW didn't just stick with FW when it came to making their special models. First GW started making Baneblades of its own, but now with the FW Leman Russ variants tourney-legal, they've also started issuing plastic versions as well. I would think that forcing people to buy certain powerful models through FW would make more revenue--I wonder if GW will take this route if XV9 Battlesuits become tourney-legal. Making people pay more than usual for in-game power has certainly worked in some areas.
Then there's the matter of rules obsolescence. The FW Leman Russ Conqueror was designed when Leman Russ tanks didn't have the "Lumbering Behemoth" rule. Originally the Conqueror variant was one of the few variants that could fire its primary weapon on the move, but that ability has become obsolete with the addition of the "Lumbering Behemoth" rule for all Leman Russes. I haven't seen any new "Experimental Rules" for the Conqueror variant to keep it current and moving it to a new niche though. Does that mean that FW is going to discontinue it?
The Missile- and Rocket-Launcher Sentinels from FW also used to have their own unique "Experimental Rules," but those are gone too with the promotion of the Missile-Launcher Sentinel to the mainstream. At least you can use them as counts-as models for Scout Sentinels with Missile Launchers, unlike the Leman Russ Conqueror with a barrel that's too short for a Battle Cannon and too long to be a Demolisher Cannon (that's got to be strange for WYSIWIG without some heavy conversion work).
Last edited by Guardian X; 5th Dec 10 at 2:23 AM. Reason: Missed A Few Things
Almost anything in the Forge World books can be used 'counts-as' for a Warhammer 40k unit. I frequently see Conquerors run as Eradicator Nova Cannon tanks or just regular Leman Russ MBTs. I have two full squadrons of Ryza-pattern Vanquishers that I also run as standard pattern Russes because the Vanquisher rules aren't very useful to me in the new codex. I use my XV9's as standard Crisis suits simply because they are so much better looking and I refuse to include anything with a number 9 or 10 in my army due to fluff reasons
As far as profits, the actual price of the models being purchased doesn't actually matter. Profit is a function of margin and volume. The resin Forge World kits, in general, are so expensive because it is significantly more expensive to manufacture them than with pewter casting or with a vast plastic production run. So, and I'm guessing at the numbers here, but if it costs GW $30 to produce one $100 plastic Baneblade tank, they make the same profit per model than they do on the $200 resin Forge World baneblade that costs them $130 to make. But with a $100 price point, they can sell 10x, 20x, who knows how many more kits and that translates directly into bigger profits.
You bring up an interesting point with the idea of 'making people pay more for powerful units.' I think that is a very dangerous line to cross. There's already quite a bit of resentment from players that don't have as much cash to sink into this hobby that it's simply too expensive to build a dynamic list due to the advent and necessity of mechanized infantry. The tanks are extremely expensive per-point compared to infantry. Currently, unit prices are standardized across the range, but starting to charge more for 'power units' would lead to a situation where the wealthiest players have the best armies and newer or less-well-funded players are at a disadvantage only due to the fact that they have a lower economic status. Players aren't stupid, that kind of thing will be noticed, and in all likelihood it would kill the hobby faster and more surely than anything else GW or a competitor could do.
Last edited by Aquila; 5th Dec 10 at 3:31 PM.
Surely Games workshop has been charging more for powerful models for years. You only have to look at the metal special characters in comparison to regular models. Admittedly they are made of metal as oppose to plastic but it seems true enough. Even the plastic space marine captain is expensive (I know you get lots of bits) when compared to plastic troops choices.
Dude, do you keep a website or blog where you post photos of your battle reports showing the miniatures on your table? If you regularly play with people who are big Forge World customers, the table must look pretty nice.I frequently see Conquerors run as Eradicator Nova Cannon tanks or just regular Leman Russ MBTs. I have two full squadrons of Ryza-pattern Vanquishers that I also run as standard pattern Russes because the Vanquisher rules aren't very useful to me in the new codex. I use my XV9's as standard Crisis suits simply because they are so much better looking and I refuse to include anything with a number 9 or 10 in my army due to fluff reasons.
And I think that GW abandoned the "purely Base 8" system for Tau awhile ago. I believe the battlesuit designations are in our numbers and in base ten "for your convenience," otherwise, we wouldn't have those custom XV-89 battlesuit variants from FW. Besides, Base 8 only uses the numbers 0 to 7, so even the base XV-88 Broadsides are out.
In the Conqueror's case, I believe that because it does nothing better than the standard Leman Russ and fires a weaker shell, no "perfectly rational" buyer would want to buy it when they can get GW Plastic Leman Russes for cheaper. For that reason it's a good bet that the model is "cast on order" only now, like the Tau Manta. FW's stock of LR Conquerors probably isn't going to move until they update the rules to give it a new niche.
From certain points of view, GW could just be "getting with the times." In other forms of collectible merchandise (and even online games), "paying more for more power" has worked very well.You bring up an interesting point with the idea of 'making people pay more for powerful units.' I think that is a very dangerous line to cross.
In any case, I wouldn't be surprised if something like this actually happened--making people pay for FW models to get the most powerful tourney-legal models.
Even before rolling to hit, a BS3 Vanquisher cannon offers a ~10% chance to kill an AV14 vehicle (better than a railgun, btw). A BS3 twin-linked lascannon has a ~4% chance of doing the same. If you're in the vehicle-killing business, the vanquisher is always a better option. A hit that does nothing is worthless.Actually, thanks to the Twin-Linked Lascannon of the Leman Russ Annihilator, you get a 1/4 chance of missing, while at BS3 the Vanquisher has 1/2 a chance of missing (I've seen people complain on forums on how often Vanquishers miss), unless you take several Vanquishers (which could get expensive and are pigeonholed) or splurge on a special character for your tanks. Of course, Vanquisher AT shells do better on the Armour Penetration role against vehicles, but the TL Lascannon is better at hitting in the first place. I'm still at a loss as to why the LR Annihilator wasn't included, since it would have been a nice trade-off between "hits more often but does less AV damage" vs. "hits less often but does more AV damage."
The Conqueror received new rules with the IA1 update pdf. It doesn't have lumbering behemoth, its gun is now R48", S8 AP3 Heavy1 small blast, and it can take a coax. Now, it's a faster moving, more accurate Leman Russ with slightly less firepower. It also costs 20 pts less. So while it's still overcosted (the way most FW units are), it isn't terrible.Then there's the matter of rules obsolescence. The FW Leman Russ Conqueror was designed when Leman Russ tanks didn't have the "Lumbering Behemoth" rule. Originally the Conqueror variant was one of the few variants that could fire its primary weapon on the move, but that ability has become obsolete with the addition of the "Lumbering Behemoth" rule for all Leman Russes. I haven't seen any new "Experimental Rules" for the Conqueror variant to keep it current and moving it to a new niche though.
There's also absolutely nothing preventing you from using the FW rules on missile launcher sentinels if you choose to. Barrage frag missiles are quite nice (though, IA3 being a 3rd ed book, they're overpriced).
That's another problem I have with Forgeworld's website. Even GW's main site now posts some of the unit stats for the models they sell. It used to be the same for FW as well, as they used to give links to experimental rules or the like for most, if not all, of their models. They should do so again, giving links to the appropriate files or books for each model on their page. Something like that would certainly be more convenient to people who want to figure out whether a certain miniature is worth getting for its rules on the tabletop.The Conqueror received new rules with the IA1 update pdf.
Thanks, but I meant that the model webpages, like the ones I linked to, should have links to the appropriate rule files or books. The page for Leman Russ Conqueror has nothing of the sort, nor do the Missile/Rocket Launcher Sentinels. Something as simple as "The rules for this model can be found in the Imperial Armour Volume 1 Update v1.1" for the former, and "The rules for Rocket/Missile Launcher Sentinels can be found in Imperial Armour Volume 3: The Taros Campaign. Alternatively, they may be used as Missile Launcher armed Scout Sentinels in the Warhammer 40,000 5th Edition Imperial Guard Codex." As I said before, GW's website now lists the statlines for most models on sale there. Having FW show at least a link to this purpose would be much more convenient for interested customers.Errata Rules Page page / Other models have direct links to their errata rules if they arent listed there.
I take it from your screen name that you own Imperial Armour Vol. 4, since Inquisitor Lok is one of the main characters in that book. Is that the case or not?
Ah i see. And i agree with your point of showing the stats under the models. BUT then fewer people would likely buy the IA armour books because they could get the rules for the models right from the page (Obviously though, if youve ever had an IA book, they are phenomenal and so well worth the price for all the pics and stories and background)
As for me having IA4, i dont One of (if not my) favorite model though in the W40k universe is Inquisitor Lok model, which is why i chose the name haha, and it bugged me hardcore when i actually still played the game, that i couldnt just get the rules for that single model without paying $70-90 for a book i needed for just one model (there was nothing else i wanted in it ) So i can easily see why you would want the stat lines to be posted.
FYI: GW posts only the STAT lines on their webpage, not the point costs. They also don't reveal the model's weapon stats. That could be something FW could do, just the stat line unless the model is still undergoing the "Experimental Rules" phase, in which displaying the point costs is relevant.BUT then fewer people would likely buy the IA armour books because they could get the rules for the models right from the page
Just to put this back on topic, here's part 2 of the jigsaw.
I hope there's a guardsman with a lit Zippo infront of that flamestorm cannon. LoLz
Brave bugger if there is!!
Looking good for a DKoK vehicle.
Pshhh nonsense, all the Death Korps vehicles are superb.
But this is pretty clearly a Malcador/Valdor chassis so in all likeliehood its a traitor vehicle.
My big Forge World order got here today, a very nice early Christmas present
Just a heads up - if you have been thinking about ordering the Sevrin Loth and Command squad - it's one of the coolest kits FW has released but it is extremely expensive. But it turns out the kit actually includes an ENTIRE SM COMMAND SQUAD kit along with the resin pieces. Since you really only need 4 leg pieces and a few arms, you're basically getting two squads there, when you break it down Loth and his Honor Guard only cost about GBP18.00 - the same price as the standard command squad.
It's actually a really good value and I gotta tell you this kit looks outstanding in person. Think about it
Hopefully you'll post up pics of your purchases (and your FW-heavy battle reports too) soon. Have you had problems with the resin casting? I've heard horror stories of people getting FW products that are warped, or have bubbles in them, or are flash-heavy, or have pieces with joints/pegs/etc. that don't fit together, or other resing-miscasting horrors.
Nice Aquila! That squads on my rather large to eventually get from FW list - You going to post pics of your finished squad in the painting section?? Id love to see the finished squad!
@Guardian, ive personnally never had a problem with FW, but i know other people hear have. You can look at this thread if you want; http://forums.relicnews.com/showthre...-and-Forgeries
In other news, if you dont happen to get FW's newletter the complete model from the Jigsaw (from the image link its called the Vlad flame)
I think its pretty cool. Huge mother of a flamer though
Ah, yes. It's actually called the Malcador Infernus. Definitely the scariest flame weapon we've seen so far!
And I'll be getting pictures up eventually. Unfortunately I have not been able to paint ANYTHING this year yet, but I'm hoping I will get a chance to keep working on my Steel Legion and Blood Ravens soon.
That trailer looks rather inadequate for that massive fething weapon. Still so awesome though
(Formerly "The Herald")
"The bible is like an EULA. People just scroll past everything and click "I agree" without reading it."
Will echo what Aquila has said about the Severin Loth and retinue, ordered two of these kits and the are amazing. Well worth it, especially Loth himself.
Personally, I can't wait to see more on the new FW Shadow Spectre Aspect Warriors. Not a big Eldar fan, but such an important new addition to their army is something I don't think I've ever seen for the Eldar.
Look at the bright side, kid - you get to keep all the money.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)