WH40K game Strike Force Agastus

[WARMASTER_]

17 minutes ago, Sword Brother Adelard said:

 

'Orbit' is a lot higher than where armospheric dropships operate. 

It happens in a few books. In Dark Imperium they have a specially modified jump bay in one of the new strike craft, in another they just walk out of a strike cruiser hangar bay.

Im aware…? Stormeagle’s and Thunderhawks both work in space as interceptor craft and as orbital drop craft so that’s not the issue

 

Aw fair enough that isn’t what the codex stated though 

Edited January 28, 2023 by WARMASTER_

[Khornestar]

I suppose one of the most exciting aspects of the missile squad is the variation all the 3D sculptors out there will produce.

 

If they make the above-mentioned shoulder quad rocket launcher a-La Arnold in Commando, I would support the heck out of that.

Edited January 28, 2023 by Khornestar

[WARMASTER_]

20 minutes ago, Iron Lord said:

Maybe in this paradigm, the strike cruiser itself is the "low-orbiting attack craft":

 

 

strike cruisers can orbit planets, including in low orbit,

they attack planets,

they are spacecraft,

 

 

combine them all and they are low orbiting attack craft.

Definitely could be the case I’d say “Attack craft” leans more heavily towards Thunderhawks + Stormeagles + Overlords as a designation 

[Arbedark]

2 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

 

I've tried. In this topic. Multiple times.

 

This topic isn't called: "Criticism of the Desolation squad"

 

The biggest issue for me is that so few of the negative comments being posted are remotely constructive, with most of them going round in circles slapping each other on the back for not liking the models. 

 

And we get mods with such insightful comments as 'you can't force people to like something' as a response, as if that adds anything of value to the thread. 

 

I'm not a fan of the Desolators, but the incessant overreacting in this thread is childish at best. Do we really need to keep reading an expression of dislike that is essentially the same comment again and again and again? 

 

If you don't like the weapons-on-weapons aesthetic, the mock-ups with the upper set of missiles located on the backpack look pretty awesome to me - provides a better balance to the model, etc. If you don't like that idea, then maybe post some other constructive ideas, or thoughts on how the models could be improved in other areas. I have a suspicion that the base models will look better in some other paint schemes, as has been the case with other primaris, so that may also help. I'm looking forward to seeing some people turn them into long fangs, as I suspect that aesthetic will work better. 

[Karhedron]

15 minutes ago, Arbedark said:

And we get mods with such insightful comments as 'you can't force people to like something' as a response, as if that adds anything of value to the thread. 

 

I'm not a fan of the Desolators, but the incessant overreacting in this thread is childish at best. Do we really need to keep reading an expression of dislike that is essentially the same comment again and again and again? 

 

People are under no obligation to be constructive, sometimes people just want to vent and as long as they are not being abusive, they are free to so so. Our job as mods is to keep the discourse civil. We are not trying to enforce positive vibes or act as thought police. 

 

If you dislike the vibe of a thread then no one is forcing you to take part. Once people get their hands on these models I am sure there will be positive threads as people discuss painting and converting them while others discuss how to get the best out of them on the table top.

 

But we are not going to shut down a thread just because some people are using it to express their disappointment. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

5 hours ago, Jukkiz said:

well well, this seems like good conversion idea

 

Quad shoulder launcher is what I was actually expecting 

[Arbedark]

14 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

 

People are under no obligation to be constructive, sometimes people just want to vent and as long as they are not being abusive, they are free to so so. Our job as mods is to keep the discourse civil. We are not trying to enforce positive vibes or act as thought police. 

 

If you dislike the vibe of a thread then no one is forcing you to take part. Once people get their hands on these models I am sure there will be positive threads as people discuss painting and converting them while others discuss how to get the best out of them on the table top.

 

But we are not going to shut down a thread just because some people are using it to express their disappointment. 

 

You might want to re-read the B&C mission statement. I've copied it below for your convenience. 

 

The Bolter & Chainsword exists to help the members of a global hobby community to better understand, engage in, and enjoy all aspects of the Warhammer 40,000 hobby through constructive discussion and the sharing of hobby-related content.

[rookie40K]

The Desolators take the grim dark of 40K and turn it into GI Joe toys. I can’t think of any models that are worse. I think they’re an embarrassment to the line and are the first GW models I think would be better off being labeled a mistake , pulled off the line and redone. Sorry to be so negative, by I feel strongly on those ones. I am obviously very disappointed. So many recent new models have stuck closely to originals or take a nod to some retro rogue trader look, and are winners, so I wish the had done that with the heavy support. Too over the top for me.
 

Dreadnought is alright but in my opinion would be better without stubbers and adding flamers/meltas under the fists. 
 

Power fists are always welcome. Love power fists. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by rookie40K

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

4 hours ago, WARMASTER_ said:

Assault marines are orbital drop troops though both Inceptors and assault marines require a dropship to get them to a certain level to drop just that the assualt marines require the dropship to go lower [Which wasn’t an issue for 10k years of SM tactics] Thunderhawks and Stormeagles are also more manoeuvrable better armoured and also act as Air superiority fighters, support, resupply and redeployment vessels for an assault, Drop Pods again not much bigger waaaay better armoured and in lore can also barley be detected or shot down, it was a redundant role to fill, so I’ll politely disagree also :) 

 

That’s like saying devastators wear power armour so Predators are redundant as they carry the same weapons. Extra protection is always good ;)

A thunder hawk or stormeagle is not an air superiority fighter. Not by a long shot.

[Captain Idaho]

What's the definition of constructive? Essentially it is on topic in thread and contributing to the original purpose.

 

To put it into perspective, if someone says "that's good, I like that model and can't wait to buy it!" They're not any more "constructive" than saying "that's poor, I don't like that model and won't buy it."

 

Basically there won't be any posting most of the time if that is your criteria. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

3 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

 

I've tried. In this topic. Multiple times.

 

This topic isn't called: "Criticism of the Desolation squad"

So you see most people here are having a good time making fun of the new unit and thought you’d turn that around single handedly?

 

most people who like them are probably avoiding posting here. Make a new topic. You’ve been given that advice several times now.

 

 

[phandaal]

16 minutes ago, Arbedark said:

The Bolter & Chainsword exists to help the members of a global hobby community to better understand, engage in, and enjoy all aspects of the Warhammer 40,000 hobby through constructive discussion and the sharing of hobby-related content.

 

Making fun of ugly models is part of the hobby. Nobody is giving a hard time to people who like the models, which in fact you can see here in this thread. If someone says "I like these" people are Ok with it. If someone says "you suck for talking about not liking these," they get pushback. Shocking stuff.

 

Plenty of people here expressing opinions in both directions without pointing fingers at people who disagree.

[Triszin]

I might do a photo shop with gravis/aggressor as the base later

[Khornestar]

2 minutes ago, Triszin said:

I might do a photo shop with gravis/aggressor as the base later

Underslung belt fed rocket fists and shoulder mounted SUPERFRAG and/or SUPERKRAK? Dial the absurdity up from 11 to 12.

Edited January 28, 2023 by Khornestar

[m_r_parker]

12 minutes ago, Triszin said:

I might do a photo shop with gravis/aggressor as the base later

 

Part of me would like to see them adopt Devastator-style reinforced legs, and keep the on the standard MkX armour. I think there's going to be plenty of cool conversions of these in the future, and I'm interested to see what the community does with these.

[WrathOfTheLion]

1 minute ago, m_r_parker said:

 

Part of me would like to see them adopt Devastator-style reinforced legs, and keep the on the standard MkX armour. I think there's going to be plenty of cool conversions of these in the future, and I'm interested to see what the community does with these.

I was thinking the same thing. An extra plate on the legs, although not quite gravis, would have changed the model a lot.

[Lord Nord in Gravis Armour]

7 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

I really hope that is not the case. I had assumed that they would be able to choose their firing profile each turn, like regular missile launchers. If you have to pick one profile before the start of the battle, that will probably be a hard pass from me.

 

Thinking about it, I don't think that would work since the squad shown has both types of missile. This implies the squad does not have to take the same variation.

 

The two types of rocket launcher have different statlines and are in fact called different things. Superfrag Rocket Launcher and Superkrak Rocket Launcher. It's not a case where the squad is equipped with a ubiquitous "Rocket Launcher" which then has different ammo choices, like the Missile Launcher you're referencing (or the Eliminators' Bolt Sniper Rifle). The reveal article backs this up, stating that the squad has "a choice of superfrag or superkrak rocket launchers." Not "a rocket launcher with a choice of superfrag or superkrak rockets."

 

So you do indeed need to pick one prior to the battle, just as you would with a Bolt Rifle or Plasma Incinerator variant.

 

EDIT: Also, as to the squad shown having both types of missiles. Check the actual box photo with the full ten men shown. Note that they are broken into two five-man squads (each having a Sergeant) and within those five-man squads, they are all sporting the same weapon build. The top squad has the two cylinders, the bottom squad all have the four-cylinder build.

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Lord Nord

[Arbedark]

26 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

What's the definition of constructive? Essentially it is on topic in thread and contributing to the original purpose.

 

To put it into perspective, if someone says "that's good, I like that model and can't wait to buy it!" They're not any more "constructive" than saying "that's poor, I don't like that model and won't buy it."

 

Basically there won't be any posting most of the time if that is your criteria. 

 

A) Pointless positive comments are effectively no better than pointless negative comments, the difference is that most positivity stops at the equivalent of the example you've provided, whereas the negative comments often spiral upon themselves to meme levels, with certain posters posting the same basic content multiple times in the same thread, or clearly trying to bait responses. 

 

B) There is plenty of actually constructive discussion going on all across the B&C, so suggesting that removing anything that could effectively replaced by a +1 / -1 scoring system would mean that there "won't be any posting most of the time" is ridiculous. 

 

10 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

Making fun of ugly models is part of the hobby. Nobody is giving a hard time to people who like the models, which in fact you can see here in this thread. If someone says "I like these" people are Ok with it. If someone says "you suck for talking about not liking these," they get pushback. Shocking stuff.

 

Plenty of people here expressing opinions in both directions without pointing fingers at people who disagree.

 

You're either misinterpreting or, more likely I suspect, misrepresenting the heart of the issue, which isn't about not being negative, but about trying to add something of actual value and substance to the forum when doing so. 

 

Threads that turn into echo chambers, and I'm making no difference here between negative ones and positive ones, aren't any good for the hobby and community as a whole. The thing is that most 'positive' threads don't turn into an echo chamber to the same degree that the negative ones do, and that anyone who dares go against negative ones gets responded to, whilst those who inject negativity into every thread largely get ignored. 

[Brother Captain Arkley]

4 minutes ago, m_r_parker said:

 

Part of me would like to see them adopt Devastator-style reinforced legs, and keep the on the standard MkX armour. I think there's going to be plenty of cool conversions of these in the future, and I'm interested to see what the community does with these.

Or even "clawed" feet Havoc style (Something not so chaotic ofc).

[Lord Nord in Gravis Armour]

3 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

Is it not perhaps just aesthetic? As the rotary missiles at the bottom are the Frag and the krak in the double barrelled part, regardless of warhead?

 

The rotary missiles should be the Castellan Launcher, since the article states that all Desolators have them and the model builds seem to back this up. The upper tubes would be the Rocket Launcher variants, which can actually be chosen.

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Lord Nord

[Triszin]

21 minutes ago, Khornestar said:

Underslung belt fed rocket fists and shoulder mounted SUPERFRAG and/or SUPERKRAK? Dial the absurdity up from 11 to 12.

I'm thinking more eradicator vs aggressor.

But aggressor frag launcher for sure, but modified

[Prot]

The only thing I don't understand is at what point did we feel we all had to agree? I actually like all the new models. The new dread threw me off aesthetically just because the 'metallic' claws seemed almost out of place on that model. But just like painting, it's a choice the painters/studio made. I could see painting those dread claws with crackling energy instead of metallics.

 

I remember when the ATV's came out. Wow did those things take a tremendous beating from the community. I never had that level of issue with them, and found the memes at the time hilarious (Super Mario specifically).

 

It's not only okay, but I think it's great we all don't agree on what looks great or not. Often when I do find a model unappealing the challenge becomes making it cool to me. I'm not good at conversions so for me this usually comes in the way of painting it to... hopefully look better, or perhaps adding effects to the weapon in this case.

 

I'm excited about these new models, especially the dread. FINALLY Cawl figured out it's time to take a step back in evolution and grab some heavy Multi Melta's and strap them on to the waist of a Redemptor! (I honestly see 2 of these in my scars or Wolves lists).

 

"Reveal time" is such a fun/cool time for all of us 40K junkies. Love it or hate it, let's just move on to the next reveal. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Prot

[INKS]

I like the dread. The desolators not so much. big surprise right? I'll likely still use them or try to use them and in true myself fashion cut off the belt feed. (I do this a lot, cut cables or belt feeds)

[phandaal]

7 minutes ago, Arbedark said:

You're either misinterpreting or, more likely I suspect, misrepresenting the heart of the issue, which isn't about not being negative, but about trying to add something of actual value and substance to the forum when doing so. 

 

Nope. Nice try though. 

 

However, I am willing to revise my comments if you can point me to a "positive echo chamber" thread on this forum where people started coming in and complaining about all the positivity having an adverse effect on their negative feelings and not adding any value to the forum.

[phandaal]

2 minutes ago, INKS said:

I like the dread. The desolators not so much. big surprise right? I'll likely still use them or try to use them and in true myself fashion cut off the belt feed. (I do this a lot, cut cables or belt feeds)

 

My Inceptors have their moon boots snipped off, and one set of cables removed from their blasters. My Aggressors have some of the tubing removed from their weapons. Some people must like all of the extra bits and doodads but for me, the streamlined profile just looks better.