Firstborn or Primaris?

[Kallas]

1 hour ago, Nephaston said:

You mean Deathwatch, Grey knights don't have Mk8 at all, and are more in line with a modified mk6, though admittedly the backpacks are similar.

Yes Deathwatch have it - I didn't make an exhaustive list of things that do have it, the ones I mentioned were the kits I could recall off the top of my head.

 

And Grey Knight Aegis Armour is not, as far as I can recall, listed as any specific Mark of Power Armour, but it is clearly Mk 8 with the distinctive gorget incorporation and abdomen armour plate.

[Marshal Reinhard]

15 hours ago, Kallas said:

Yes Deathwatch have it - I didn't make an exhaustive list of things that do have it, the ones I mentioned were the kits I could recall off the top of my head.

 

And Grey Knight Aegis Armour is not, as far as I can recall, listed as any specific Mark of Power Armour, but it is clearly Mk 8 with the distinctive gorget incorporation and abdomen armour plate.

Grey knight armor lacks the round things at the angles that mk 8 has

[Kallas]

20 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Grey knight armor lacks the round things at the angles that mk 8 has

Well it's definitely not Mk 8 then 

[Marshal Reinhard]

28 minutes ago, Kallas said:

Well it's definitely not Mk 8 then 

Well, no. Never been stated to be. It's typically referred to as its own thing. That you can call upon a similiarity? Well done, but there's a lot of similarities between marks. That Aegis would incorporate design elements of mk8 would make sense, but would not mean its absolutely mk8.

 

Sorry if pointing out a difference between the two rustles your jimmies.

[Kallas]

1 hour ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Well, no. Never been stated to be. It's typically referred to as its own thing. That you can call upon a similiarity? Well done, but there's a lot of similarities between marks. That Aegis would incorporate design elements of mk8 would make sense, but would not mean its absolutely mk8.

It's more that it's the least identifying feature of Mk 8, while the far more significant features (the gorget and the abdomen plating) are very much present, and are noted as the main advantages of Mk 8 armour. If it walks like Mk 8, and looks like Mk 8, and quacks like Mk 8...it's probably a Mk 8 duck.

 

The Aegis itself is actually described as a separate device and as a "psychoconductive lattice" worked into armour. It's generally referred to as Aegis Armour, but it's not actually Aegis Armour, it's the Aegis built in to Power Armour. So if you want to contribute some kind of source that disproves it being Mk 8 please do, otherwise it's much more realistic to consider it to be Mk 8 with the additional bits that Grey Knights use to ward themselves. Which is generally what it's described as (with the exception of calling it Mk 8 specifically).

[Marshal Reinhard]

48 minutes ago, Kallas said:

It's more that it's the least identifying feature of Mk 8, while the far more significant features (the gorget and the abdomen plating) are very much present, and are noted as the main advantages of Mk 8 armour. If it walks like Mk 8, and looks like Mk 8, and quacks like Mk 8...it's probably a Mk 8 duck.

 

The Aegis itself is actually described as a separate device and as a "psychoconductive lattice" worked into armour. It's generally referred to as Aegis Armour, but it's not actually Aegis Armour, it's the Aegis built in to Power Armour. So if you want to contribute some kind of source that disproves it being Mk 8 please do, otherwise it's much more realistic to consider it to be Mk 8 with the additional bits that Grey Knights use to ward themselves. Which is generally what it's described as (with the exception of calling it Mk 8 specifically).

So mk.X is mk.8 too then by that not so infallible logic of yours then. Sharing a design feature does not make them the same, it means they share a design feature. Most marks of power armor do in fact. 

 

And that's not how the burden of proof works. You do not prove a negative. You, who're instead stating your pet theory that they're the same, can try and do so despite its never stated to be so.

[Kallas]

7 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

So mk.X is mk.8 too then by that not so infallible logic of yours then.

I mean, it is a progression of it yes, like Mk8 is of Mk7. Not quite sure what you're trying to prove here. Mk8 is an evolution of Mk7, and MkX is an evolution of Mk7/8.

But Mk8 is not MkX, because MkX has features Mk8, and the Grey Knight models for example, does not have, such as the ankle nodule.

 

11 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

And that's not how the burden of proof works. You do not prove a negative. You, who're instead stating your pet theory that they're the same, can try and do so despite its never stated to be so.

I've been showing that the GK armour is Mk8 because it is composed of Mk8 features. I was asking for something that might actually call it out as something specific (and as mentioned, Aegis is not the 'Mark', it is a separate thing that is combined with the armour, including Terminator Armour which is not in the same chain of armour as Mk8), not demanding that you disprove a negative.

 

And you're right, it's not been stated to be Mk8, but it shares basically every design cue of Mk8 and the models were released to show the GK having the best equipment available (which, at the time, was Mk8 Power Armour). Logically, it's Mk8. Maybe new GK models would/will use MkX. Currently, they use Mk8 - heavily modified (eg, the psychic hoods and Aegis), but it's Mk8.

[Marshal Reinhard]

You're the one out with something to prove. You categorically stated that x=y. I pointed out a difference. I pointed out that x has never been officially stated to by y. That didn't sit well with your view, and you demanded I prove myself.

 

I think we're done here.

[Kallas]

12 minutes ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

think we're done here.

Sure. You seem to be ascribing more malice to my words than I actually am though.

[Blindhamster]

like @Kallas I noticed they used in both the video and writeup for terminators "modern space marines" when referring to size, rather than primaris. This continues to nod toward the idea that the distinction between the two kinds is being pushed away. When we get info on their rules, I suspect it'll become clearer still.

[DesuVult]

I feel GW has made an effort to have 30k and 40k compatible for the cross sales and this is likely to continue with things like new armor marks.  This can be scene with HQs.  30k power armor HQs even in plastic like the chaplain were on 32s, like their 40k equivalent.  Primaris came out with power armor HQs on 40s and the new praetors have also moved to 40s to follow.

Edited March 29, 2023 by DesuVult

[Captain Idaho]

Well actually in the latest Warcom article, GW did mention this which I thought peculiar:

 

 

So talking/celebrating Dreadnoughts spans both HH and 40K, naturally, but yes it is interesting to see what those HH Dreads do in 40K tenth.

[spessmarine]

17 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

Well actually in the latest Warcom article, GW did mention this which I thought peculiar:

 

So talking/celebrating Dreadnoughts spans both HH and 40K, naturally, but yes it is interesting to see what those HH Dreads do in 40K tenth.

of course, need an extra heavy dread that actually looks good

[Karhedron]

The Brutalis looks an interesting comparison to the Leviathan. Both are T7 but the Leviathan is a fair bit more durable with +1 Wound and a 2+/5++ save. The Brutalis hits harder IMHO. The closest loadout on the Leviathan is Cyclonic Melta Lance and Siege Claw. The Twin MMs on the Brutalis get 4 shots at 24" range vs D6 at 18" range for the Leviathan (although the Leviathan is S9, Blast is a mixed blessing since it cannot fire in melee). The Brutalis hits significantly harder in melee and can reroll wounds with Claws.

 

Overall they are well balanced with the Brutalis having an edge in damage while the Leviathan is more durable. However that loadout of Leviathan costs 40 points more and (currently) requires a CP to field. Overall I think that this favours the Brutalis although all this could change with 10th just around the corner.

[Guest Triszin]

On 3/30/2023 at 8:35 AM, Captain Idaho said:

Well actually in the latest Warcom article, GW did mention this which I thought peculiar:

 

 

So talking/celebrating Dreadnoughts spans both HH and 40K, naturally, but yes it is interesting to see what those HH Dreads do in 40K tenth.

Please.

 

Please drop the command point req.