White Scars: Mark IV or Mark III Armor?

[Kol Saresk]

And not exactly correct. There is nothing to say that the Fists didn't confiscate Mk IV in Deliverance Lost. All that Deliverance Lost says is that the Fists gave the RG all of the Mk VI they had confiscated to that point.

 

From what I've seen, many "inconsistencies" and "retcons" aren't really inconsistencies and retcons. They're personal views that see one fact stated in one place, but nowhere else and so they believe anything that comes later but doesn't repeat it to be a retcon. Even though that original bit has never actually been retconned.

 

For example, many people took the Night Lords being at Istvaan V as a retcon. And that Nostramo being destroyed twenty years before the Heresy was a retcon. Even though in the IA articles it states that after destroying Nostramo, the Night Lords went so far off the map that the Imperium had to send recon fleets to follow the trail of dead worlds just to know they still existed and that when the Heresy came, the Night Lords announced their true allegiance in a very obvious way. But it fails to describe just how they did it.

 

This is one of those. We know from time immemorial that the Fists captured Mk VI armor and Mk VII designs from Mars. Mechanicum tells us that there was also Mk IV, which is a logical conclusion giving that Mk IV was still in production. Deliverance Lost tells us that they gave some of the Mk VI they had scavenged to the Raven Guard.

 

None of these sources contradict each other. It's just that they highlight specific details and then because those details aren't repeated elsewhere, they are viewed as a retcon.

 

And if it was a retcon, then we better stop saying Mk VII was captured during the Martian Schism because we have yet to see even a mention of the Mk VII designs in either BL or FW printed material.

[Marshal Reinhard]

Duly noted

[Zangetsu]

I just find it a bit nonsensical that FW / GW / BL have designated a hodge podge of parts a specific armor mark. It doesn't make it a separate designation.

 

 

 

 

Some form of standardisation across Mark V suits is is notable, despite their apparently random creation and individual varied origins, due to the dissemination of molecular bonding techniques across the legions.

 

[Tyrannicide]

This has been an illuminating topic, couldn't have come at a better time. I've been searching online for any information regarding the loyalist seizure of armor marks at Mars. :)

[b1soul]

I think thematically, Corvus pattern fits them the most, no?

 

...but due to they're always on the periphery of the Crusade, I suspect most look something like this:

 

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f262/SGM-Daly91/Horus%20Heresy/WSAstartes_MkII_zps99a95135.jpg

[Malios]

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter.

 

 

The debate over which Legion had access to which mark of armour and when is highly subjective from its outset. For starters, both Forge World and Black Library contradict one another regularly which gives few stable fluff grounds to argue over. An example of this is that most players believe that the designated MkVI (not the prototypes) were issued to the loyalist legions post Istvaan massacre. Black Library supports this, but Forge World had the Alpha Legion using their own MkVI Alpha variant during the Istvaan massacre itself, and for all we know, questionably before. There's lots of "Forge World Said this, Black Library said this now Gamesworkshop's design team has contradicted both" going on that takes away solid foundations to nitpick.

 

 

Secondly, Forge World sell MkII - MkVI variants to give players that freedom to make their own decision for their army. That's what this hobby is about. If someone wishes to invest $1000+ and hundreds of hours on an army designed to appease their own aesthetic appeal, who are we to discourage them? If a guy (or more rarely a girl) rocked up to the local store with a beautifully painted heresy Ultramarines army in MkVI armour and I started ranting that Ultramarines didn't have MkVI armour during the heresy (I wouldn't do this practically, for all I know the Ultramarines could have had MkVI), not only would they probably not play a game with me, but it would mean as little to them as telling an MSU spam tournament player that their army doesn't adhere to the codex astartes. They built the army that they wanted after all and their enjoyment of their own expensive investment comes before everything else.

 

 

In saying all that, I love the fluff. As an Australian, the fluff and the setting has kept me in the hobby for the past 15 years (it certainly wasn't the price of the hobby in this country I'll tell you that now.) But, the fluff is only one part of the hobby and not something worth nitpicking in its most minute details. I can understand an uproar if the Ultramarines started summoning warp storms with legions of daemons intentionally to stop the Tyranid Hive Fleets, but arguing over which legion had which armour and when? Its just not worth it. The holes in the lore are left intentionally so that players can come to their own conclusions.

[Kol Saresk]

Again, Deliverance Lost was written before Extermination. So it isn't "Forge World wrote this and then Black Library agreed."

 

It is literally Black Library wrote that the Raven Guard were given completed suits of Mk VI and then Forgeworld reiterated. And Forgeworld made it very obvious that the Alpha variant was something the Alpha Legion had created based of of the prototype designs from some years earlier. And makes it that only four Legions have been seen with access to the Mk VI, and one of those four lost all of theirs, leaving only three with access.

 

So if people are reading that and then saying there is contradiction, retcon or error, I would encourage them to reread, and to due so keeping in mind what was published first and how it goes together. It serves no one to say that since the background is a mess that nothing matters. Because the background is less of a mess than it appears and the clutter usually comes from those interjecting their opinion rather than repeating the facts.

 

And Forgeworld only sells one set of Mk VI. For 40K armies.

 

So yes, variety is encouraged. That's why we see things like the Sarum pattern, SoH Legion upgrade and the Gorgon Terminators.

 

However, if someone asks about what the background says, because they want what is officially published to influence their army, then for us to tell that it doesn't matter is doing them a disservice as well as hurting our own credibility.

 

So since this is a topic where the OP wants to be influenced by official background, it would be best if people actually put forth official background to justify their claims.

 

So for the White Scars, we know they had access to Mk II-III. I'd wager limited access to Mk IV. What with the Traitors getting the lion's share and them being trapped in Chondax for three years or so. However, I would expect it to pop up in their Mk V as they salvaged armor from the battlefields.

 

Mk VI and VII is something we would not see until they had come into physical contact with Terra. Which judging by the end of Scars, would only be when they were called back to help defend against the Siege.

 

That's the official background.

 

The unofficial background is that the Mk II-V are supposed to be so varied that you could build just about anything and find a way to justify it. For example, if you had a Beakie helm pop up in your White Scars, you could say it was an attempt at creating a more aerodynamic helmet. And so on.

 

But officially, a White Scars army before the Siege is likely to made up mostly of Mk II and Mk III with the occasional Mk IV. As the Heresy progresses, the Mk V will begin to trickle in add more than a bit of variety.