Armour marks at Terra.

[klisof]

What happened to all the old fluff about mark VI being strongly associated with the defence of terra by the loyalists? It was an old bit of fluff, but was still in use at least as recently as the badab war books and only makes sense if Mk VI is one of the more common armour marks in use at terra

 

Has the extensive use of Mk VI in the defence of terra been completely recon'ed to Mk VII?

[Kol Saresk]

What happened to all the old fluff about mark VI being strongly associated with the defence of terra by the loyalists? It was an old bit of fluff, but was still in use at least as recently as the badab war books and only makes sense if Mk VI is one of the more common armour marks in use at terra

 

Has the extensive use of Mk VI in the defence of terra been completely recon'ed to Mk VII?

From what sources I can find cited, it has been Mk VII since the days of Rogue Trader. It says the source is an article by Rick Priestly from White Dwarf UK 129 I believe. Lexicanum even goes to the page. If someone has access to that and has no problem typing it up, we should be able to hit this nail on the head.

[MordentHex]

Your models, you can have them in any MK armor you want. If your opponent has a problem with it, tell them ok, its artificer armor. If that doesn't work tell him to bugger off and go play with the 12 year olds.

[GrandMagnus]

Good point MordentHex, but Im quite a fluff fanatic myself (alltough if playing with someone they I wouldnt comment on it).

[MordentHex]

Which Edition fluff? fan fluff? BL fluff?  Meta fluff? LOL  Don't worry about it to much, Mark 7 armor in the HH is actually MK 5 with more bling.

[Kol Saresk]

Yeah, but strangely enough, and going by what I have read(Lexicanum) and heard(here), it would almost seem as if two different groups are citing the same source for two different views.

 

An old, 2nd Ed-era article says the Mk VI was prominent at Terra.(Here)

 

An article written by Rick Priestly in White Dwarf says Mk VII was prominent.

 

So honestly, I'm confused. Either

 

1.) Both were prominent.

 

2.) Someone, somewhere, whether it be the person who posted on Lexicanum or someone else, isn't remembering the article correctly, which is possible since not everyone has eidetic memory.

 

Personal opinion, Mk VII gets developed on Terra. Mk VI is/was being found on Mars and being confiscated by the Imperial Fists. So both could easily feature to one extent or another(although I might be against entire armies in just one of the Marks) at Terra with Mk VI popping up outside Terra in sparse numbers.

[MordentHex]

then just combine them and say in "Limited Quantity"?

[Kol Saresk]

 

then just combine them and say in "Limited Quantity"?

Yep. That's my personal opinion.

[infyrana]

Limited Quantity - with the occasional rare stash being found... allowing then for whole chapters being done in Mk VI to stop the people from quoting different fluff to suit their design on not allowing people to field it for fluff reasons etc.

[spu00sed]

I find the whole armour mark system somewhat funny.

 

It works after a fashion, with subsequent marks being an improvement on the thunder armour, until they reach near perfect power armour. I think mark VIII is almost there, with artificer possible being the pinnacle of power armour design.

 

However this is assuming that subsequent marks are upgrades to the original, and some aren't.

 

Mark III iron armour is technically mark IIb, a variant used for special actions rather than an improvement.

 

Mark V is a catch all term for any cobbled together armour

 

Then we have variants like praetor and Sarum , which could be cosmetic alterations or their own families of armour marks

 

In my own special world I would like power armour to have types and marks

 

For example imperious power armour mark IIb, used for boarding actions (the power armour we all know and love retconned to only reaching mark VI

Sarum power armour mark VIII, now with bunny ears.

[GhostMalone]

In reality mkiv was the pinnacle MKVIII is in reality vii with a collar :/

 

MkV was a stopgap mk

MKvi was iv with better sensors but was never fully completed before the schism

Mkvii was a slap together by loyalist tech adapts for better armour think mkiv with whatever they can cram into it.

 

Sometimes simpler ie, mkii mkiv is better

 

But MKIII is epic

[Don the Oiler]

Regardless of which mark was "prominent" at the Siege, i think hardly any of the Legions fighting there had the time and resources to reequip their entire armed forces with a specific mark of armour beforehand. They probably sent anything there that could carry a bolter, so it would still look like a giant potpourri.

[GrandMagnus]

Well, seems like this thread has answered my question although its a good debate. Now atleast I dont feel entirely guilty if a I add a box a tacticals or Black Rage squads mixed with older armour marks in a BofT army.

[Marshal Rohr]

I always imagined power armor production to be like the M4. You got thunder armor, which would be the Car15. Mark 2 is like the generic M4, Mark 3 is the M4 with the first generation of attachments, Mark 4 is the HK416 (high end, high efficiency), Mark 5 is like building an M4 from spare and refurbished parts, Mark 6 is like using a high quality upper on mass produced lower, and mark 7 is like a Daniel defense (not original or as high speed as the mark 4, but reliable and easy to make in quantity). Mark 8 is like adding a bunch of magpul stuff to a Daniel defense.

 

The mark 4 is the top end, but the other stuff gets the job done.

[jeremy1391]

I always imagined power armor production to be like the M4. You got thunder armor, which would be the Car15. Mark 2 is like the generic M4, Mark 3 is the M4 with the first generation of attachments, Mark 4 is the HK416 (high end, high efficiency), Mark 5 is like building an M4 from spare and refurbished parts, Mark 6 is like using a high quality upper on mass produced lower, and mark 7 is like a Daniel defense (not original or as high speed as the mark 4, but reliable and easy to make in quantity). Mark 8 is like adding a bunch of magpul stuff to a Daniel defense.

 

The mark 4 is the top end, but the other stuff gets the job done.

And with that you just lost all the Brits ;)

 

But as an American I follow ya lol.

[Olis]

I always imagined power armor production to be like the M4. You got thunder armor, which would be the Car15. Mark 2 is like the generic M4, Mark 3 is the M4 with the first generation of attachments, Mark 4 is the HK416 (high end, high efficiency), Mark 5 is like building an M4 from spare and refurbished parts, Mark 6 is like using a high quality upper on mass produced lower, and mark 7 is like a Daniel defense (not original or as high speed as the mark 4, but reliable and easy to make in quantity). Mark 8 is like adding a bunch of magpul stuff to a Daniel defense.

The mark 4 is the top end, but the other stuff gets the job done.

And with that you just lost all the Brits

But as an American I follow ya lol.

I followed it. Sort of. I got what M2C meant, anyway. ;)

[Kol Saresk]

The Mk V would also include any unofficial designs, such as a Praetor pattern. Which was just seeing production by the Veridian Forge not long before Calth.

 

So if you just bought an upper receiver from this company, a lower receiver from that company, and so on so forth until you had your own personalized M4, every single last part could be brand new but because its an unofficial design, its Mark V.

[infyrana]

lol jeremy, I got it, and I know a fair few more who would too :)

 

Just reading above from other comments and think I misread or have been confused by something.  Jaspcat wrote "MKvi was iv with better sensors but was never fully completed before the schism", so if this is the case, why is Mk IV still considered the pinnacle / best?  Something doesn't add up or hold true, or is mis-written via differing sources etc.

[Excessus]

Mark IV, V (well, depending on what mark the chestpiece was from originally ofc) and VI had exposed cabling on the chest and other parts. The chestplate to protect them was one of the few "new" things with the Mk VII as far as I know. They also went back to the Mk IV knees after Mk VI...

[No Foes Remain]

I always imagined power armor production to be like the M4. You got thunder armor, which would be the Car15. Mark 2 is like the generic M4, Mark 3 is the M4 with the first generation of attachments, Mark 4 is the HK416 (high end, high efficiency), Mark 5 is like building an M4 from spare and refurbished parts, Mark 6 is like using a high quality upper on mass produced lower, and mark 7 is like a Daniel defense (not original or as high speed as the mark 4, but reliable and easy to make in quantity). Mark 8 is like adding a bunch of magpul stuff to a Daniel defense.

The mark 4 is the top end, but the other stuff gets the job done.

And with that you just lost all the Brits

But as an American I follow ya lol.

As Brit, I actually understood that. Just....

[GhostMalone]

lol jeremy, I got it, and I know a fair few more who would too :)

 

Just reading above from other comments and think I misread or have been confused by something. Jaspcat wrote "MKvi was iv with better sensors but was never fully completed before the schism", so if this is the case, why is Mk IV still considered the pinnacle / best? Something doesn't add up or hold true, or is mis-written via differing sources etc.

Well MKVI was still a prototype in it's testing phase, a lot of the suits ended up being modified by individual legions during the heresy but as it was never deemed officially complete it never took over the MKIV.

 

As stated by M2C it's all reasonable but in my opinion MKVII was taking parts from everything, the MKIII resilience with the MKIV components throwing in the manoeuvrability of the MKVI and use of Sarum pattern helms.

 

It's like throwing all your favourite snacks into a bowl mixing it and eating the concoction, all the flavours are there but it's still pretty horrendous

[infyrana]

Ah cheers, yeah better understood now thanks.  Yup, taking the best from everything doesn't guarantee you end up with the best, sometimes it just doesn't fit together no matter what you try.

[GhostMalone]

And that's why MKVII is visually Unappealing compared to early MK, unfortunately GW decided to try bling it up and add crests to MKVIII and it looks rediculous

[AGPO]

According to the (very) old White Dwarf compendium, Mk VI would have been better described as Mk VII beta. Mk IV was superior but notoriosly difficult to maintain, containing a lot of difficult to replicate materials and technology. Work had already begun on what would later be called the Mk VII which incorporated the best elements of the Mk IV but made use of easier materials and fixed certain issues. With the outbreak of the Heresy, those components of the Mk VII that were nearing completion were combined with modified Mk IV parts and rushed into service as the Mk VI. At the same time attrition rates meant that ad hoc solutions were needed to rapidly re-arm the legions, and faster, cheaper models were rushed out and later classified as Mk V. Development on the Mk. VII was moved to Terra and completed shortly before the siege hit full swing. The article makes no mention of Mk VIII as at the time no models had been released wearing it.

 

I'll copy out the full article tomorrow if I get time. It's Rogue Trader era so obviously much as been retconned since but as the original article on marks it's interesting reading.

[Moonstalker]

I disagree with that rifle analogy.  Mainly cause the 416 is overmarketed crap.

 

Thunder armor is like the AR-10.  The original, and not without flaws.

 

Crusade is like the M16A2.  A big step forward.  Improved sights, a different cartridge at its heart, several kinks worked out.  Iron is like the M16A3 - the same as the A2, except it exchanges Safe-Semi-Burst for Safe-Semi-FA (or a little bit of mobility for some extra frontal armor plating).

 

Maximus is like the M16A4.  A big improvement over everything that came before it, but the rail systems and attachments all add to the cost and complexity.

 

Mark 5 is a Frankengun that you built out of all the cheapest used parts you could find on the AR15.com Equipment Exchange.  Sure, it works.  After a fashion.  But the anodizing on the upper and lower receivers don't match, the barrel is worn out, the rifle is overgassed and underbuffered, and the idiot who installed the lower parts kit snapped off one of the ears for the tigger guard when hammering in the roll pin.  And being an AR15, it doesn't have select-fire.  All that said, it still goes bang when you pull the tigger.

 

Corvus is an AR15 that you were doing a nice build on, but then there was a gun-control panic and parts are flying off the shelves faster than you can buy them.  Sure, you've got some high quality parts in there, LaRue scope mount, a Timney trigger, but you ended up having to make due with a forged upper instead of the monolithic billet upper that you wanted.

 

Mark 7 is your custom AR15 after the panic is over and you can actually finish it up the right way.

 

The analogy isn't perfect, as FN Herstal makes M16A4's and sells them to the US military at a contract price that is much lower than what you could get a comparable M16A4gery for, so the switch to AR's when the armor marks were supposed to become more affordable is a reversal.