New Chaos Models

[Orange Knight]

5 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

Irrelevant, the lore still has loyalist marines chapters owning contemptors.  The fact it has a legends profile for gaming acknowledges this fact.

 

Custodians still have them as well…

 

We're not talking about the lore. We're talking about the tabletop.

 

The lore exists to serve the tabletop, not the other way around. I think people tend to forget this.

 

I'm making a realistic prediction and outlining what I would personally like to see for the Chaos range going forward, keeping in mind the trends we've seen over the last 10+ years.

[Evil Eye]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

Ok, how do you feel about the leviathan?

The Leviathan is a mighty relic of the Heresy, it and its ilk intended to be frightfully rare in the 41st Millennium. I like it, with the caveat I'd like it a lot less if it was suggested everyone and their mother had one of them and they were running around the galaxy. Powerful and rare archeotech is coolest when it's, you know, rare.

 

It's also a very specialized walker intended as a siege-breaker rather than the general support role of the Castraferrum or Contemptor and thus not directly comparable, as it is A: intended for less common and more specific use-cases than its smaller brethren and B: is designed with very different specifications. The fact that the Redemptor is supposed to replace the Castraferrum but is the same size as the Leviathan just doesn't work for me- they're just not the same thing.

[Indy Techwisp]

40 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

The Leviathan is a mighty relic of the Heresy, it and its ilk intended to be frightfully rare in the 41st Millennium. I like it, with the caveat I'd like it a lot less if it was suggested everyone and their mother had one of them and they were running around the galaxy. Powerful and rare archeotech is coolest when it's, you know, rare.

 

It's also a very specialized walker intended as a siege-breaker rather than the general support role of the Castraferrum or Contemptor and thus not directly comparable, as it is A: intended for less common and more specific use-cases than its smaller brethren and B: is designed with very different specifications. The fact that the Redemptor is supposed to replace the Castraferrum but is the same size as the Leviathan just doesn't work for me- they're just not the same thing.

 

The Redemptor being physically large is a design choice they made when deciding what role a Primaris Dreadnaught would have.

It is no longer a tool designed to enter the cramped corridors of Space Hulks (that's what you use the still in service Castaferrums for), rather it is now a force multiplier for troops on a semi-standard open-or-urban battlefield. It being large and heavily armoured is an advantage in this theatre and it's role in targeting Heavier enemy assets.

 

This really doesn't mean that much, other than to say that an upscaled Helbrute shouldn't grow to match a Redemptior as they don't really serve the same role (iirc the one in SM2 is still noticeably smaller than the Redemptor despite being larger in comparison than the model is), it just needs to grow to match the scale of the Legionnaires.

 

As for wanting another Chaos Dred, I Will remind you that CSM, TSons, WE and DG all share one dred option, where as LSM and all their supplements have FOUR (five if you could the Invictor Warsuit which is a Dred chassis used like a Mech from Avatar) along with some supplement exclusive Dred options.

The idea of this hypothetical second dred not also being a hulking flesh abomination is mostly for aesthetics and ease of use for the Chaos factions who are less... flesh-monstery (like TSons and Alpha Legion. Also Iron Warriors who are mostly metal monstrosities instead).

[The Praetorian of Inwit]

It would be good to give CSM players another Dreadnought. The Helbrute certainly has its place (I'm actually quite fond of the model myself) but a more 'traditional' Dreadnought would be nice. The boxnaught or the Contemptor with a chaos upgrade sprue would be groovy.

 

Any imfo on when these things might actually release? Are we talking a big release for 11th, or could this be a end of edition release?

[Indy Techwisp]

7 minutes ago, The Praetorian of Inwit said:

It would be good to give CSM players another Dreadnought. The Helbrute certainly has its place (I'm actually quite fond of the model myself) but a more 'traditional' Dreadnought would be nice. The boxnaught or the Contemptor with a chaos upgrade sprue would be groovy.

 

Any imfo on when these things might actually release? Are we talking a big release for 11th, or could this be a end of edition release?

 

The actual point of the thread was new CSM Mutilators (possible multibuild kit with Obliterators) and a new Defiler kit with Cult Legion parts on the sprue for customisability.

 

There's also the whole "possible Iron Warriors" release thing as well.

[The Praetorian of Inwit]

When did the Defiler come out? Was it '99? 

 

I'm curious as to why they would give a new Defiler parts for EC or World Eaters when they could give those factions their own unique Daemon Engines. 

[Scribe]

6 minutes ago, The Praetorian of Inwit said:

When did the Defiler come out? Was it '99? 

 

I'm curious as to why they would give a new Defiler parts for EC or World Eaters when they could give those factions their own unique Daemon Engines. 

 

Because CSM as a macro faction still exists, because its easier to add a bit/sprue, than 5 (CSM, TS, DG, WE, EC) kits?

[Indy Techwisp]

13 minutes ago, The Praetorian of Inwit said:

When did the Defiler come out? Was it '99? 

 

I'm curious as to why they would give a new Defiler parts for EC or World Eaters when they could give those factions their own unique Daemon Engines. 

 

WE already have the Defiler iirc and EC have a severe lack of Armour.

 

Also in Lore the Defiler is the most common kind of Daemon Engine for some reason, so it makes sense that everyone can have it.

[Mogger351]

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

The Leviathan is a mighty relic of the Heresy, it and its ilk intended to be frightfully rare in the 41st Millennium. I like it, with the caveat I'd like it a lot less if it was suggested everyone and their mother had one of them and they were running around the galaxy. Powerful and rare archeotech is coolest when it's, you know, rare.

 

It's also a very specialized walker intended as a siege-breaker rather than the general support role of the Castraferrum or Contemptor and thus not directly comparable, as it is A: intended for less common and more specific use-cases than its smaller brethren and B: is designed with very different specifications. The fact that the Redemptor is supposed to replace the Castraferrum but is the same size as the Leviathan just doesn't work for me- they're just not the same thing.

That's fine that you don't like the castaferrum being updated to the redemptor, but it is what it is. You need to accept it even if you don't like it. The helbrute due to warp juice is whatever size it needs to be I think in reality. As long as it doesnt get bigger "because redemptor thicc" or whatever, fine by me.

 

I think it's fair to say you like the game in it's past, desperately wanting those rose tinted days back. That's a fair perception and pov to have, however it doesn't mean the current units, setting and fluff are wrong. It's a happier time if you're not forever fighting the now in the name of the then.

[Kharn13]

Just going to put this soul grinder artwork here from Warhammer IG back in summer. Would love this Khorne variant. 

[Evil Eye]

1 hour ago, Mogger351 said:

You need to accept it even if you don't like it.

No, I absolutely do not. And I'm not going to either. If GW makes what I consider to be terrible decisions I will complain about them, as is my right. You're welcome to disagree of course, but telling me I need to just accept GW erasing everything I like about the setting is incredibly condescending.

[Indy Techwisp]

12 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

No, I absolutely do not. And I'm not going to either. If GW makes what I consider to be terrible decisions I will complain about them, as is my right. You're welcome to disagree of course, but telling me I need to just accept GW erasing everything I like about the setting is incredibly condescending.

 

There's a difference between accepting that something happened and agreeing with that thing happening.

 

GW aren't going to turn around and revert the entire game to 7th edition no matter how much people complain otherwise they would've done so right when 8ths started.

 

ETA:

I should also note something about the Redemptor Chassis specifically.

Even tho they changed a lot with the Primaris Marines, some of the designs are also intended to be semi-throwbacks to Heresy stuff.

I could see the intention behind the Redemptor being so big is Cawl realising that if he just ignores basically all the rules like always he can mass produce a slightly worse Leviathan Dreadnaught for as cheap as the Castaferrum, and then deal with any issues discovered in the field as "holy maintenance instructions" for the Techmarines afterwards.

Edited Tuesday at 10:36 PM by Indy Techwisp

[Mogger351]

7 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

No, I absolutely do not. And I'm not going to either. If GW makes what I consider to be terrible decisions I will complain about them, as is my right. You're welcome to disagree of course, but telling me I need to just accept GW erasing everything I like about the setting is incredibly condescending.

The redemptor is not going anywhere, it isn't nonsensical in any capacity. As a result you'll have to enjoy spending the next however many years 40k exists refusing to accept it's existence.

 

Edit: what Indy said basically.

Edited Tuesday at 10:31 PM by Mogger351

[Robbienw]

4 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

 

We're not talking about the lore. We're talking about the tabletop.

 

The lore exists to serve the tabletop, not the other way around. I think people tend to forget this.

 

I'm making a realistic prediction and outlining what I would personally like to see for the Chaos range going forward, keeping in mind the trends we've seen over the last 10+ years.

This is objectively false.  The models are the key part of Warhammer, then the lore that goes around them.  The game exists to service the models.  Hence why units get designed first and their rules are done after that.  It’s always been models and background led.

 

Your argument is still inconsistent.  A chaos version of the Redemptor is consistent with 40k lore and models design paradigms.  

Edited Tuesday at 10:47 PM by Robbienw

[Indy Techwisp]

4 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

Your argument is still inconsistent.  A chaos version of the Redemptor is consistent with 40k lore and models design paradigms.  

 

Good thing we have explicitly not been saying we want that then, isn't it?

 

Heck, the Redemptors are only involved in this argument so we can point at them and say "Look how many they have and how small the one we share is in comparison. Why can't we get another one?"

Edited Tuesday at 10:52 PM by Indy Techwisp

[Indy Techwisp]

I feel like if this conversation was instead about making the Castaferrum slightly larger to match the "Accurate Firstborn" scale used by Horus Heresy and CSM there wouldn't be anywhere near as many arguments against it 

[01RTB01]

37 minutes ago, Indy Techwisp said:

 

There's a difference between accepting that something happened and agreeing with that thing happening.

 

GW aren't going to turn around and revert the entire game to 7th edition no matter how much people complain otherwise they would've done so right when 8ths started.

 

 

I genuinely hope not as 7th (and 9th) were both horrific Dumpster fires. The best thing to come out of 7th was heresy 1.0.

[Joe]

1E Heresy released during Sixth Edition.  Seventh Edition was just under two years later.

[Orange Knight]

11 hours ago, Robbienw said:

This is objectively false.  The models are the key part of Warhammer, then the lore that goes around them.  The game exists to service the models.  Hence why units get designed first and their rules are done after that.  It’s always been models and background led.

 

Your argument is still inconsistent.  A chaos version of the Redemptor is consistent with 40k lore and models design paradigms.  

 

The tabletop IS the models (Tabletop Miniatures is the correct designations for the various kits). I never said the game dictates the lore.
GW creative can come up with any model or idea, and the lore will be spun around it. So yes - we can have a bigger Chaos Dreadnought.

 As for your accusation of inconsistency on my part, I think you have misunderstood my argument.

 

 

 

 

[Robbienw]

29 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

The tabletop IS the models (Tabletop Miniatures is the correct designations for the various kits). I never said the game dictates the lore.
GW creative can come up with any model or idea, and the lore will be spun around it. So yes - we can have a bigger Chaos Dreadnought.

 As for your accusation of inconsistency on my part, I think you have misunderstood my argument.

 

 

 

 

 

No the correct designation for the various kits is Citadel Miniatures.

 

The game was made around the models, not the other way around.  The models have always been the main draw.  Hence why you have vast numbers of collectors who don't play the game.

 

I'm not sure you understand the argument you are making, but suffice to say you haven't produced a convincing reason as to why a Redemptor is not suitable for a chaos army but a Contemptor is, when it reality both would be suitable lore wise and thematically.

 

[Orange Knight]

1 hour ago, Robbienw said:

 

No the correct designation for the various kits is Citadel Miniatures.

 

The game was made around the models, not the other way around.  The models have always been the main draw.  Hence why you have vast numbers of collectors who don't play the game.

 

I'm not sure you understand the argument you are making, but suffice to say you haven't produced a convincing reason as to why a Redemptor is not suitable for a chaos army but a Contemptor is, when it reality both would be suitable lore wise and thematically.

 

 

You're arguing semantics which means that at this point you have nothing to offer and are just trying to get a cheap one-up.

Also, don't assume to tell me what argument I've made as you've clearly failed to grasp the points I've raised. I'll be happy to raise them again for you. Please read:
 

 

-Games Workshop are diversifying the ranges as time has gone on. Models are being restricted to a single faction with less and less cross-over. We can see this objectively in the Chaos Legions which are becoming distinctive armies, with only a few shared models across them.

 

-Games Workshop have not released a kit that is shared across Chaos and Imperium for close to 25 years. Things like the Rhino, Predator, Landraider - which are all just the same model, but with a Chaos upgrade sprue, are not how new models are designed. Each faction now gets unique kits.

 

-Even the Hellbrute was a deviation from the classic Dreadnought. Although it was similar, it's a fully unique model and not just a "Boxnaught with spikes"

 

-For the reasons I have listed above, I do not believe that Games Workshop will release a "Spiky" Redemptor Dreadnought. They will probably make an altogether different Chaos Dreadnought to eventually replace the Hellbrute. I merely suggested that they lean into the Legion history by creating a unique evolution of a Contemptor or Leviathan design. And yes, I believe that whatever comes will be substantially bigger than the current Hellbrute.

 

 

Please read the bullet points above and then explain to me why they've caused you to become angry and snide in your responces.

Edited yesterday at 12:17 PM by Orange Knight

[Robbienw]

2 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

You're arguing semantics which means that at this point you have nothing to offer and are just trying to get a cheap one up as you've lost the discussion.

 

No, I'm not arguing semantics.

 

I said I'd like to see a Chaos Redemptor.  For valid thematic and lore reasons, which make sense in universe. 

 

For some reason this upsets you.

 

Argue yourself in circles all you like, but i'd still like to see one produced, and hope in future they continue on the path of making modern renegade space marines.  SM chapters that have gone rogue are an interesting part of the lore.

 

[Orange Knight]

8 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

 

No, I'm not arguing semantics.

 

I said I'd like to see a Chaos Redemptor.  For valid thematic and lore reasons, which make sense in universe. 

 

For some reason this upsets you.

 

 

 

 

It doesn't upset me. I just gave you a list of reasons why I don't think it's going to happen. I could be wrong, and GW could reverse 20 years of trends. Nothing you've said makes me think they will.

And now you've changed the subject and are talking about "Renegade Space Marines" which is something different entirely. Non-Chaos Renegades exist in the lore, but no so much as a model line. So sure, in the lore a renegade chapter will probably have a Redemptor Dread. The distinction doesn't exist in the rules or models, however.
It might exist in the future, and you can homebrew it in the meantime - either way, it's not what this topic is about.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 11:50 AM by Orange Knight

[Robbienw]

16 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

It doesn't upset me. I just gave you a list of reasons why I don't think it's going to happen. I could be wrong, and GW could reverse 20 years of trends.

 

Yes, but i dont care why you think its not going to happen, so why do you keep going on about it?  

 

I'm saying I'd like to see one, and the reasons why. 

 

FYI, when i'm talking about renegade space marines, i obviously mean Chaos Space Marines, just the ones who originated from loyal chapters that went renegade.  As oppossed to ones who originated from legions.  But lets not attack strawmen because we are upset by someone advancing the possibility of Chaos Primaris. 

Edited yesterday at 12:01 PM by Robbienw

[Orange Knight]

1 minute ago, Robbienw said:

Yes, but i dont care why you think its not going to happen, so why do you keep going on about it?  

 

You don't care what I think, and yet you assume that everyone should care about what YOU think?

Very interesting way of trying to get your point across. It's a losing strategy, but you're welcome to try it.

 

3 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

I'm saying I'd like to see one, and the reasons why. 

 

And who said it's wrong to desire such a model? No one had made such a statement.