Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I get the impression I'm the only one that really likes the Aquillon Terminators.

 

Yes, they are static looking, but in a way that makes them look regal and sophisticated. 

 

I even like their proportions...

21 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

I get the impression I'm the only one that really likes the Aquillon Terminators.

 

Yes, they are static looking, but in a way that makes them look regal and sophisticated. 

 

I even like their proportions...

Sure but can anyone answer me why they are painting them copper? Is this what lore says? The copper does not look like gold, and it does not look like bronze, and it reminds me of those plastic toys that look like they were trying to be metal, and copper at that. I'd say it's not befitting a custode.

20 hours ago, Adeptekon said:

Sure but can anyone answer me why they are painting them copper? Is this what lore says? The copper does not look like gold, and it does not look like bronze, and it reminds me of those plastic toys that look like they were trying to be metal, and copper at that. I'd say it's not befitting a custode.

 

While it's true that in reality most 'gold' branded paints are closer to copper or bronze, if you told most people to go and pick out a gold paint they'd immediately reach for Retributor Armour or similar. I don't think it's much more complicated than that.

 

If GW suddenly started painting gold using Vince Venturella's now semi-famous gold recipe, a lot of people would be asking 'why are Custodes brass instead of gold now? Are GW stupid?' 

 

Edited by Lord Marshal
On 9/18/2026 at 9:35 PM, Halandaar said:

Honestly I'm actually kind of impressed by a number of things here: making the model line "official" for both systems, expanding the 40K roster to include units that were previously Heresy only, and implementing changes that should significantly reduce the number of minis fielded in a game (and therefore reduce the cost of playing the army) are all very unlike the GW of the last ten years or so. 

 

Agreed. Small armies have the side-effect of being more attractive to collect due to the lower time and cash investment. I hope this won't lead to the absurd situation that armies that should be rare by lore will be extremely commonplace in practice and vice-versa for horde armies.

7 hours ago, Borbarad said:

 

Agreed. Small armies have the side-effect of being more attractive to collect due to the lower time and cash investment. I hope this won't lead to the absurd situation that armies that should be rare by lore will be extremely commonplace in practice and vice-versa for horde armies.

Well that laready is the case and does happen. They need to make horde elements represented by other means such a recycling units that keep coming back or units that repopulate as the game goes on.

 

A faction where you need to spend 4 times as much to get a game ready, alongside 4 times as long building and painting, where in the current climate you exist to have them die a lot and achieve little individually is a tough sell honestly.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.