Valrak 2026 release rumours video

[Lexington]

10 hours ago, Blindhamster said:

Even in the Dark Imperium book, gravis isn't described as a replacement for terminator armour.

 

I think that whatever happened to make GW change the course of development for what eventually became 8th Edition/Dark Imperium/Primaris, it occurred before novels had been developed or even contracted, which is pretty late in the process compared to model design. The theoretical iteration that would've had Gravis as an explicit replacement for Terminator armor never saw publication, and isn't something GW's ever even admitted to - it's something we can only infer. It's kind of hard to explain the decision-making around the Primaris any other way, tho.

[jaxom]

43 minutes ago, Lexington said:

 

I think that whatever happened to make GW change the course of development for what eventually became 8th Edition/Dark Imperium/Primaris, it occurred before novels had been developed or even contracted, which is pretty late in the process compared to model design. The theoretical iteration that would've had Gravis as an explicit replacement for Terminator armor never saw publication, and isn't something GW's ever even admitted to - it's something we can only infer. It's kind of hard to explain the decision-making around the Primaris any other way, tho.

Not quite. The original printing of Dark Imperium was 200 (maybe 100?) years post Maledictum Cicawhatever. The 2nd printing was 10 years.

Edited 6 hours ago by jaxom
Spelling errors

[Mana]

8 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

They tend to add and bolt things on to the lore as opposed to outright changing it.

 

One notable example of change is the timeline retcon in the Dark Imperium novels, and the community made a big fuss about it.

Honestly I wasn't even going to reply, both of us clearly have different opinions and that is fine. There is nothing bad with disagreeing.

 

That being said, GW outright changes the lore all the time, like I said they do it when it's convenient to them, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that GW changing the lore is a bad thing per se, but they do it all the time, and pretending they just "tend to add and bolt things on the lore" most of the time, is pure nonsense. Examples: female custodians, as GW said they always existed, the example you gave: Indomitus crusade lasted 100 years and was over, that got also changed, Rogal Dorn being dead, changed to just missing without a hand, etc. Also I don't want to go off-topic, so this is my second and last post about this, sorry everyone!

 

And being more on-topic, I hope the refreshed dark eldar units look good, if they do new kabalites like the did the new eldar guardians that would be enough for me. Also I'm quite interested in how the refreshed space marines vehicles might look.

 

[Orange Knight]

There are examples of retcons, yes. Another big one is how the Necrons operate.

 

But keep in mind that this is a 40yr old setting serviced by hundreds of authors over generations. It's pretty consistent overall. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Orange Knight

[phandaal]

1 hour ago, jaxom said:

Not quite. The original printing of Dark Imperium was 200 (maybe 100?) years post Maledictum Cicawhatever. The 2nd printing was 10 years.

 

What does this have to do with the development timeline for the new Marine range though? He was saying that "Gravis as Terminators" seems like something that was come up with and then abandoned early on before the official lore was written.

 

2 hours ago, MoriyaSchism said:

Isn't it more limited than tracked vehicles and traditional land speeders? It can't fly over friendly units because the repulsor plates pound the ground constantly to keep the vehicle afloat. It's like having an APC or a transport helicopter that can't support troops up close safely. 

 

Yeah, it doesn't fly. It basically punches itself off of the ground with its grav plates. Anything under it gets crushed because it is subject to the full weight of the tank.

 

It should also not be able to go over water, unless something happens between now and the 41st Millennium to make water solid enough to hold up the weight of a tank.

[Orange Knight]

And yet it does go over water. It's literally used to assault positions over the ocean on a planetary engagement against the Tau.

 

The Gravitic field can be focused or dispersed, so it can cover a large surface area or a more narrow space - It isn't just hammering a spot underneath the tank at all times, and using it to cover a larger area suspends it over water.

 

And yes, the tank can also be dropped from orbit, again, this happens in the lore during a key engagement. 

 

 

So taking all this into account, I would like some more compelling rules for the unit. You can hate the Grav tanks all you want, but the lore has been written and I'm simply asking for it to be reflected on the tabletop.

[Evil Eye]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

And yet it does go over water. It's literally used to assault positions over the ocean on a planetary engagement against the Tau.

 

The Gravitic field can be focused or dispersed, so it can cover a large surface area or a more narrow space - It isn't just hammering a spot underneath the tank at all times, and using it to cover a larger area suspends it over water.

 

And yes, the tank can also be dropped from orbit, again, this happens in the lore during a key engagement. 

 

 

So taking all this into account, I would like some more compelling rules for the unit. You can hate the Grav tanks all you want, but the lore has been written and I'm simply asking for it to be reflected on the tabletop.

Sounds terrible. Genuine Saturday morning toy commercial cartoon tier. A bad toy commercial even, like the Dic seasons of G.I. Joe. "Blast into action with the new Primaris Repulsor! It can go over all terrain with its gravitic fields, even water! And when it drops from orbit behind enemy lines, the forces of Chaos better beware! New Primaris Repulsor from Games Workshop! Intercessors sold separately."

 

And as you yourself said, GW retcons things all the time. So frankly they should retcon the grav-tanks to make some degree of sense rather than being "Land Raider and Falcon had a lovechild with none of the weaknesses of either".

[jaxom]

4 hours ago, jaxom said:

I think that whatever happened to make GW change the course of development for what eventually became 8th Edition/Dark Imperium/Primaris, it occurred before novels had been developed or even contracted,

^The original text to which I was replying

 

Then the question:

2 hours ago, phandaal said:

 

What does this have to do with the development timeline for the new Marine range though? He was saying that "Gravis as Terminators" seems like something that was come up with and then abandoned early on before the official lore was written.

It addresses the time frame of GW's course change for what becaem 8th Ed/Dark Imperium/Primaris as post-Dark Imperium and not before novel had been developed or even contracted.

 

As far as I am aware, the first product to be impacted by the course change was the Psychic Awakening series.

[phandaal]

3 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

And yet it does go over water.

 

I am aware of that. Hence why I said it should not be able to. It is bad lore. @Evil Eye nailed it as to why.

 

Edit: actually, now that I think about it more, we could just delete that entire book and let Phil Kelly write the Tau novel he really wanted. Wave racer tanks are the smallest thing wrong with that abomination, but taking them out alongside Azrael's character assassination would be icing on the cake.

 

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

Genuine Saturday morning toy commercial cartoon tier. A bad toy commercial even, like the Dic seasons of G.I. Joe.

 

Actually wrote this and deleted it from my last post. It is 100% Saturday morning cartoon stuff. Those were great shows, for Kindergartners. 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by phandaal
Just write Tau novels, Phil!

[01RTB01]

4 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

And yet it does go over water. It's literally used to assault positions over the ocean on a planetary engagement against the Tau.

 

The Gravitic field can be focused or dispersed, so it can cover a large surface area or a more narrow space - It isn't just hammering a spot underneath the tank at all times, and using it to cover a larger area suspends it over water.

 

And yes, the tank can also be dropped from orbit, again, this happens in the lore during a key engagement. 

 

 

So taking all this into account, I would like some more compelling rules for the unit. You can hate the Grav tanks all you want, but the lore has been written and I'm simply asking for it to be reflected on the tabletop.

 

"Developed as a heavy combat transport for the Primaris Space Marines, the Repulsor is unique amongst Adeptus Astartes battle tanks in that it is held aloft upon a thrumming cushion of grav-waves. Ventral plates upon the tank's underside project and direct these waves of gravitic force and, while they do not permit the Repulsor to soar into the skies in the manner of the lighter Land Speeder, they do afford it exceptional manoeuvrability for an Imperial tank. The Repulsor can traverse not only solid ground but also such extreme terrain as lava flows, acid lakes and frozen oceans with ease. Rubble and barricades are similarly no obstacle to this relentless vehicle, which simply hovers over the obstructions and keeps going."

 

It's a chunky hovercraft. It shouldn't be anywhere near the fly keyword.

 

If difficult terrain was still a thing it could have rules for that. As it is, not sure what else it should have other than maybe making charges against it harder.