Legions Imperialis Legions Imperialis

[SkimaskMohawk]

2 hours ago, Wurrkop said:

Obviously its going to depend on the models in question, the models in the Galactic Crusader line im going with are very well designed.

 

Ya i have the mk3 galactic crusaders and my guy did way more than the 1 support you have lol. Like many, many more.

[Raziel-TX]

How do the galactic crusaders scale to these new LI Marines?  I have about two companies worth of crusaders I have been holding off painting as I wasn’t sure how well they lined up with these new ones. 

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Just now, Raziel-TX said:

How do the galactic crusaders scale to these new LI Marines?  I have about two companies worth of crusaders I have been holding off painting as I wasn’t sure how well they lined up with these new ones. 

From everything I've seen, they look fine without any need for re-sizing

[Mandragola]

It's very odd they chose poses for some of the tacticals that require these big bits of dead space, or whatever you call it. It was not necessary - they could have just positioned the models differently and avoided it, or maybe done those few poses with separate guns.

 

Everything else is great so it's forgivable, but not really explainable. It just seems like something that never should have got through QC.

[MoriyaSchism]

5 minutes ago, Mandragola said:

It's very odd they chose poses for some of the tacticals that require these big bits of dead space, or whatever you call it. It was not necessary - they could have just positioned the models differently and avoided it, or maybe done those few poses with separate guns.

 

Everything else is great so it's forgivable, but not really explainable. It just seems like something that never should have got through QC.

They could have made them two piece models like the missile launcher models. Sure it would have been fiddly, but a good pair of tweezers would sort that out.

[Wurrkop]

11 minutes ago, Raziel-TX said:

How do the galactic crusaders scale to these new LI Marines

Dont have any originals to compare with but going by this pic: 

 

 

And cutting the bases off a STL of tacs, im now realizing that they are nearly 1mm short, the green block behind them is 9.8mm tall.

 

Welp, i guess i should thank you as ive only printed off my tacs.

 

To Reprint larger, or not to Reprint, that is the question.

[Matcap86]

For me the difference was big enough to resize. But I'm a real stickler for having everything in exactly the same scale.

[Marshal Rohr]

The gigantic coins on the 3d print files will probably go away pretty quickly, some hero will do the green army man stand between the legs to match the new style. 

[DuskRaider]

56 minutes ago, Mandragola said:

It's very odd they chose poses for some of the tacticals that require these big bits of dead space, or whatever you call it. It was not necessary - they could have just positioned the models differently and avoided it, or maybe done those few poses with separate guns.

 

Everything else is great so it's forgivable, but not really explainable. It just seems like something that never should have got through QC.

It’s really only the one pose. The others have a slight bit of overcasting, but then again so do my 28mm Plague Marines. I intend to stick the one that’s the worst either in the middle of the base or at the edge with that side facing in so it’s not really noticeable. 
 

At the end of the day, there’s a good chance that it’ll be wiped off the board in a turn or two with how I’m seeing Battle Reports go. It still blows my mind that the scale of this game is so big that a whole unit of Marines is a single wound and drop like flies. 

[Dark Shepherd]

One thing thats annoyig me building the tanks, knights, titans, is that theres a lot of confirmed releases we dont know the profiles for so it messes up weapon loadout selection a little

[Raziel-TX]

1 hour ago, Wurrkop said:

Dont have any originals to compare with but going by this pic: 

 

 

And cutting the bases off a STL of tacs, im now realizing that they are nearly 1mm short, the green block behind them is 9.8mm tall.

 

Welp, i guess i should thank you as ive only printed off my tacs.

 

To Reprint larger, or not to Reprint, that is the question.

Thanks for looking into it. 
 

I’ll go ahead and use my current crusaders and mix them with the actual LI Marines I have coming in. Next batch of crusaders will be scaled up a bit. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

46 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

The gigantic coins on the 3d print files will probably go away pretty quickly, some hero will do the green army man stand between the legs to match the new style. 

 

Having just made an infantry box from GW after doing a bunch of prints with the traditional stands/inserts, the biggest annoyance from the GW models was free standing placement. Gave me some whfb flashbacks with ranking up models.

 

So I'd hope they keep the original stands; there's files for insert bases and various retailers sell them like vanguard miniatures.

 

1 hour ago, Raziel-TX said:

How do the galactic crusaders scale to these new LI Marines?  I have about two companies worth of crusaders I have been holding off painting as I wasn’t sure how well they lined up with these new ones. 

 

There is a difference:

 

 

 

[Marshal Rohr]

Draw a star on the base in sharpie and add a model to each point. 

[Mandragola]

1 hour ago, Dark Shepherd said:

One thing thats annoyig me building the tanks, knights, titans, is that theres a lot of confirmed releases we dont know the profiles for so it messes up weapon loadout selection a little

For titans you should probably magnetise and for knights there aren't many options. Or I guess now there are some for Questoris - it never used to matter much in AT.

 

While we don't know exactly what profiles things will have we do basically know what's coming. There will be vindicators and they'll have demolisher cannons. Land Raiders will have lascannons and some transport capacity, and so on.

 

I think the most common decision tends to be whether to go for something with point defence or a lascannon. I think the best option is to do whole squadrons one way or other. Have some squadrons set up to kill enemy tanks, with lascannons all over. Have others ready to mow down infantry, and possibly mount something like an anti-building turret gun if that's an option. Demolisher guns and point defence combine well because non-demolisher guns without PD will be wasted if you shoot a building.

[Marshal Rohr]

Why would anyone ever make Battle Tanks dedicated to Anti-Tank when you can field entire squadrons of Tank Hunters and Super-Heavy Tank Hunters? This is same stupid advice people got at the beginning of 2nd Edition when everyone was making every single unit dreadnaught killers when the majority of infantry options were not available in plastic yet? They are just now releasing the solution to lascannon heavy weapons squads. 
 

Do not waste your time mono-tasking your Armor units before the dedicated anti-tank units are released. Do not go all in on a play style before thing like tank hunting infantry gets here and makes all those Leman Russ have to hide at the other side of the board. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

3 hours ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Draw a star on the base in sharpie and add a model to each point. 

But why lol.

 

Instead of just putting your guys in their divots and rotating them to face the direction, you're saying to pre-mark the locations, place them and re-arrange the spacing, and have a harder time keeping them stable when you want to adjust their direction? For ease of building, the stands and divots are far better. 

 

Quote

Why would anyone ever make Battle Tanks dedicated to Anti-Tank when you can field entire squadrons of Tank Hunters and Super-Heavy Tank Hunters? This is same stupid advice people got at the beginning of 2nd Edition when everyone was making every single unit dreadnaught killers when the majority of infantry options were not available in plastic yet? They are just now releasing the solution to lascannon heavy weapons squads. 
 

Do not waste your time mono-tasking your Armor units before the dedicated anti-tank units are released. Do not go all in on a play style before thing like tank hunting infantry gets here and makes all those Leman Russ have to hide at the other side of the board. 

Because similar to the 2nd edition situation, the math is right? You look at the predator and see that you can get an auto cannon or an accurate las for the turret. The autocannon averages 0.55 wounds to a marine compared to the las' 0.50, but there's a much bigger difference of 0.22 vs 0.38 against a 3+ vehicle; the las is the better all-rounder choice (plus it has better range). So why not go all anti-tank on the predator? Who cares if the sicaran venator or falchion will be able to do it better, if your preds are better placed at killing all targets (since the bolters literally can't hurt vehicles)? LRBTs are great killing enemy armour for a lot of reasons. They're really cheap, the vanquisher is really good at it, their save is fantastic for firefights, and the range allows them to not get close to all the melee stuff that rolls over them. Instead, you can use the huge squads of infantry to deal with the infantry. Or the sentinels. Or rapiers. Or even the baneblade. 

Idk what the reference lascannons in 2nd is supposed to mean. They're good against everything and are cheap enough to reach critical mass and burn through every common unit type. Same thing with dedicated AT in LI; you can get a ton of it and it works fine against the stuff its supposed to be weak against. Don't make weak units to give currently non-existent ones more of a role later on.

Edited December 4, 2023 by SkimaskMohawk

[Marshal Rohr]

Because it looks like your models are in cupcake trays. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

Models that aren't based look bad? Shocker. 

[Sword Brother Adelard]

8 hours ago, Mandragola said:

maybe done those few poses with separate guns.

 

Again though, this is the same community that moaned incessantly when GW split the MKVI pads specifically to avoid the studs having this exact problem.

 

If they had made the marines multi-part, you can bet they would be more expensive, we'd get less to a sprue and suddenly all of these middle aged gamers with laser eyeballs would be complaining about how many boltguns they'd lost on the carpet due to these fiddly stupid tiny parts.

[Orion]

15 minutes ago, Sword Brother Adelard said:

 

Again though, this is the same community that moaned incessantly when GW split the MKVI pads specifically to avoid the studs having this exact problem.

 

If they had made the marines multi-part, you can bet they would be more expensive, we'd get less to a sprue and suddenly all of these middle aged gamers with laser eyeballs would be complaining about how many boltguns they'd lost on the carpet due to these fiddly stupid tiny parts.

Not thinking we should submit to that line of thinking, but you're not wrong. 

 

People do whinge, and people do not understand plastic.

There's a lot of "they should be able to..." without really getting the issue. 

And for some, quality is really low on their priorities.

[Vogon]

So I've discovered that tha Baneblade main turret has recesses for 5x1mm magnets. 

I'm excited to see what alternative turrets Forgeworld come up with.

Cheers 

Vogon 

[Marshal Rohr]

It’s so you can swivel the turrets and don’t have to glue them to keep them together. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Marshal Rohr

[Matrindur]

12 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

It’s so you can swivel the turrets and don’t have to glue them to keep them together. 

Likely just that since no other baneblade version has a turret and would need a different body instead. (unless that is different in 30k)

[tzeentch9]

8 hours ago, Dark Shepherd said:

One thing thats annoyig me building the tanks, knights, titans, is that theres a lot of confirmed releases we dont know the profiles for so it messes up weapon loadout selection a little

Just build a balanced force then…

[Nagashsnee]

2 hours ago, Sword Brother Adelard said:

 

If they had made the marines multi-part, you can bet they would be more expensive, we'd get less to a sprue and suddenly all of these middle aged gamers with laser eyeballs would be complaining about how many boltguns they'd lost on the carpet due to these fiddly stupid tiny parts.

 

So none of these people are expected to buy and gluy any tanks then right? You know the sprues with dozens of tiny boltgun size plastic bits that must be cut and glued on.

And of course thats why they also made those but ugly missile launchers which are one big piece... Or how the dreadnoughts are over half a dozen tiny pieces....or the sentinels.

 

It weird how ONLY the boltguns were a danger to these 'middle aged laser eyed' people. 

 

But at least since they did go this way the infantry sprues are CHEAPER then the boxes which are just endless tiny bits right? Imagine if you made an argument about the danger of tiny bits in a game FULL TO THE BRIM with tiny bits, and price when the price is the SAME with everything else. Really makes you ask yourself if just MAYBE we could have gotten pretty little tactical marines instead of the glob squad.