Atia Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Öhm nope you are just plain wrong lol Godhammer is the name of the lascannon pattern The oldest LR pattern is the Proteus, that's the old Rogue Trader one Then you have the Armoured Proteus The Phobos, which is the normal GW Land Raider The Crusader and it's Redeemer variant The Prometheus as command variant, aswell as the new WW exclusive one which name i have forgotten lol Achilles-Alpha and it's precessor the Achilles The Helios with it's WW launcher And last but not least the Ares (vindicator cannon and heavy flamer sponsons) and the Terminus Ultra ... (and yeah, it doesn't matters what was in Rogue Trader, if FW retconns it, FW's lore > 1st edition stuff .... >.>) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211590 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkangilos Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Jeffersonian, can you provide a quote with a citation strait from the rogue trader source book thag designates it as such? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211592 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Oh and: The lascannons are of the Godhammer Kz9.76 design, requiring replacement barrels after 2000 shots.[4] The standard Land Raider (Phobos) armed with Twin-linked Lascannons and Heavy Bolters is sometimes referred to as the Land Raider Godhammer. It is so named for the Lascannons it mounts, which are known as the Godhammer pattern. This name is used mostly on online forums. In-universe, it is never referred to as such. oh, and actually, the LR in the RT rule books was called Land Raider Hellfire in Warhammer 40,000 Chapter Approved - Book of the Astronomican, page 69 Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211601 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffersonian000 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Jeffersonian, can you provide a quote with a citation strait from the rogue trader source book thag designates it as such?Not going to bother just to win an internet debate, which will just get ignored anyway. Truth be told, we started calling it the Godhammer to differentiate Land Raiders (LR) from Leman Russes (LR). It became more of a thing when the Crusader (LRC) first appeared, prompting the terms LRGH and LRBT, which fit well when the Redeemer (LRR) was added. The name Phobos came out of left field, a name drop from GW assigned to the MkIII chassis used for the Crusader and standard kits. Proteus is just a FW tag for its version of the original, a name that did not exist until FW retconned it. The Spartan was from a White Dwarf photo, which lead to a backstory. I do temember the Hellfire name, but no one ever called it that since Godhammer had been in use for years. Pretty much all of the pattern names are retroactive history, modern nomen applied to things that already had names. Take the Warlord Titan for instance. The original was fondly teferred to as the "Beetle-back" for over a decade before the first boxy Warlord model came out, which was quickly followed by the heavy "green" Warlord model a few months later. We now call the old Beetle-backs "Mars pattern", and the big green one "Lucius pattern" despite it actually being a "Proxima pattern" whike the originsl MkII Warlord is the true "Lucius pattern". There is a lot of history in the game which both coincides and exists outside of the current narrative fluff. SJ Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211749 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Truth be told, we started calling it the Godhammer to differentiate Land Raiders (LR) from Leman Russes (LR). It became more of a thing when the Crusader (LRC) first appeared, prompting the terms LRGH and LRBT, which fit well when the Redeemer (LRR) was added. yeah, so it's not official and pretty bad fandom - and has nothing to do with the fluff .... The name Phobos came out of left field, a name drop from GW assigned to the MkIII chassis used for the Crusader and standard kits. that is pretty much false, Phobos was only for the lascannon LR - the Crusader/Redeemer is the pattern name ... it's not called Land Raider Phobos Crusader oO Proteus is just a FW tag for its version of the original, a name that did not exist until FW retconned it It's not really a retcon as the original LR had no official name besides the "Hellfire Land Raider" label in BotA - it's not a retcon if it adds and doesn't contradict existing official fluff. it's also pretty much not a retcon if it contradicts fan fiction or fan names for something xD edit: also, old fluff mentioned that they had a variety in arms for the LR - so hellfire may be the proteus without it's auspex array after all^^ EDIT: The difference between Proteus and Hellfire: Hellfire only had one lascannon, Proteus has two. The Spartan was from a White Dwarf photo, which lead to a backstory. true, it was called Land Raider Spartan back then and was the first LR type used to transport Terminators Pretty much all of the pattern names are retroactive history, modern nomen applied to things that already had names. they never had names - only cause you called it that way doesn't mean anything^^ edit: an example: I give the FW upgrade kits and Legion Specific Terminator variants unofficial names in my WIP thread 'cause it adds to my personal background imo. - but just 'cause i use this names doesn't mean that they are official at all - and if FW starts to re-name their variants, their fluff > my fluff ... There is a lot of history in the game which both coincides and exists outside of the current narrative fluff. and? truth is that the current narrative fluff is right - especially far more than some fandom .... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211769 Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommodusXIII Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Not going to bother just to win an internet debate, which will just get ignored anyway. We ask for sources so we can track them down and read up. Saying "You'll just have to take my word for it" contributes nothing to the stock of community knowledge. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211775 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffersonian000 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Given the negative pushback, there really is no reason to participate. People don't want to know how things were, just how they are now. Have fun. SJ Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211906 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Given the negative pushback, there really is no reason to participate. People don't want to know how things were, just how they are now. Have fun. SJ The lore is the lore, and calling the Land Raider Phobos "Land Raider Godhammer" is wrong - you can do that, but it's still wrong^^ Also, it's not like "the things were so", because i never heard the designation Godhammer for anything other than the lascannons - again, it may be a nickname mostly used in internet forums or your local store or whatever, but not an official thing - and that's not really what people want to know. Worst case someone things it's an official designation, and shares that mistake - that would be wrong. You can call a Caestus Assault Ram a brick, but brick isn't the official name Edit: The lore is wonderful, and reading the books is it too, so thanks, i actually have pretty much fun giving sources or quotes or pics regarding lore =) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211910 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkangilos Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Lol, we weren't negative. We provided you with sources from first edition, and you failed to provide anything (as usual. In fact, you have never supported your claim with any real evidence. We might take you a bit more seriously when you make claims like this if you did actually support it with literal quotes, and sources. But you always just say, "It's there. I saw it." Well we don't see it, and we have the books in front of us when we make our claims. So you need to provide the page where we can see what you are saying). Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211912 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Targetlock Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 not citing where you come across the quote or roughly where it comes from just gives an air or matter of factness and smugness which i guess is not what you are trying to do. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4211923 Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffersonian000 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Was hust explaining were the term comes from, and why it matters. SJ Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212189 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminus Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Off-topic, but it's Revelation, singular. Not Revelations, plural. This only further serves to cast doubt on your veracity. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212194 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Was hust explaining were the term comes from, and why it matters. SJ And since it's not official, it still doesn't matters at all :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212344 Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommodusXIII Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Alright, cool it down and let's get back to the topic at hand. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212358 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 The MkII only appeared in Epic. actually, nope - FW released the Mark IIb for 40k too :P http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/catalog/product/600x620/99590101149_MK2BPREHERESYLANDRAIDER1.jpg Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212702 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frater Cornelius Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Hm, looks like I was right calling it Phobos then. Anyway, topic. I would not go for the Spearhead, at least not with Cult. Too expensive. A single allied Land Raider will do a better job given point distribution and balance within the list. However, when playing Skits, the Spearhead might be solid. Vanguard are Cheap. They can ride in there and mince Infantry with their guns while the LR Phobos go to town on AV. Sicarians might also benefit from it with assaulting out of one. However, the advice I will ultimately give you is to wait until Imperial Armour 14, which is supposed to be AdMech. Maybe we will see the Macroraid Explorator or Triaros in there. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212710 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Hm, looks like I was right calling it Phobos then. Anyway, topic. I would not go for the Spearhead, at least not with Cult. Too expensive. A single allied Land Raider will do a better job given point distribution and balance within the list. However, when playing Skits, the Spearhead might be solid. Vanguard are Cheap. They can ride in there and mince Infantry with their guns while the LR Phobos go to town on AV. Sicarians might also benefit from it with assaulting out of one. However, the advice I will ultimately give you is to wait until Imperial Armour 14, which is supposed to be AdMech. Maybe we will see the Macroraid Explorator or Triaros in there. Yep - Phobos is the right term^^ if someone is interested in LR (and Rhino) lore - that video is awesome: And yeah, i would probably wait till IA 14 too for now^^ Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212718 Share on other sites More sharing options...
BassWave Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Hm, looks like I was right calling it Phobos then. Anyway, topic. I would not go for the Spearhead, at least not with Cult. Too expensive. A single allied Land Raider will do a better job given point distribution and balance within the list. However, when playing Skits, the Spearhead might be solid. Vanguard are Cheap. They can ride in there and mince Infantry with their guns while the LR Phobos go to town on AV. Sicarians might also benefit from it with assaulting out of one. However, the advice I will ultimately give you is to wait until Imperial Armour 14, which is supposed to be AdMech. Maybe we will see the Macroraid Explorator or Triaros in there. Actually, vanguard charging out the front of a land raider phobos wouldn't be a bad idea. With their toughness shenanigans, relentless and the fact they have variable weapon skill, they actually pair up nicely with land raiders. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/314864-the-legacy-of-arkhan-land/page/2/#findComment-4212969 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.