raven guard 1369 Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 And they were promoting librarians as more powerful than your average, how powerful are we talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FerociousBeast Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 It's obvious why the Grey Knights of Titan need something more than their Ancient Dreadnoughts to take on Greater Daemons and Daemon Princes! Dreadnoughts are Vehicles, Greater Daemons are Monstrous Creatures, and as we all know Monstrous Creatures penetrate Vehicle armor really easily! It's just not a fair fight! Monstrous Creatures are needed to fight Monstrous Creatures! Oh wait, there went Rules Limitations, jumping into the fluff again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momosgarage Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Did you want GW to give the GK a version of the furioso? Yes, the back story for the Furioso at least makes sense. Where has the Nemesis Dreadknight been all this time? Did they use it during the Heresy? Is it difficult to maintain like a dreadnought? Can regular space maring units get them too under special circumstances? Wjhy does the driver wear Terminator armour? The whole idea of the thing is stupid. This weapon just comes out of nowhere as an unknown Deamon killing machine. I'll say it again, its LAME. Also don't compare it to the stormraven, or rhino variants becuase at least they look like progressive improvements over previous models. What the Nemesis Dreadknight based on in the STC? A dreadnought, a penitent engine, or a warhound? Who knows. So in the grand scheme of the 40k universe, the best super soldiers in the galaxy need power armor, but wait if they run into something tough they need Terminator armor, but if they die they can become uber dreadnought, but if they run into something really tough they can don Nemesis Dreadknight armour, but if its even tought they can call in a Warhound. Never ending grades of upgrades is a really stupid concept for 40k armies and thats exactly what this is. Also pluging in one "super-suit" into another seems more like a Tau thing than an Astartes thing in the grand sceme of things. To give something to the positive side, I most definately would have liked this better as a special adeptus mechanicus unit. At least with them I can say, "well they don't have many of them and the AdepMech have access to stuff space marines don't" In that army they would be one offs. Yes, I know Grey knights are rare, but would they really use this instead of a Dreadnought Furioso. Its just one more unhead of STC device to maintian and worship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Fisting Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Man the staff at GW don't read ANY of the old stuff for inspiration. You know they could have just brought back Imperial Robots to fill the role of the Dreadknight. That would've been pretty stupid as artificially intelligent robotics are considered heresy as far as the Imperium is concerned. Aren't psykers considered heretics by the Imperium too? And yet look how much the Imperium uses them. The Imperium will allow pretty much anything as long as it benefits them. The Dreadknight model might be questionable, but if we have learned anything from the Stormraven its that it contains a crap load of interesting bits that can be used to create something better. I'm looking forward to this kit to see what robotic creations come out of it :P They have 'sanctioned' psykers. Psykers are still human. If robots are fine, then why does the AdMech not have any? Everything has to have some amount of humanity in it to be kosher for the Imperium. Hence dreadnoughts, servitors, servo-skulls, skitarii, etc. If robots were fine then Space Marines would have droids instead of servitors and serfs, battlebots instead of dreads and the AdMech would have robo-warriors instead of skitarii. The Imperium, as it is written now, does not use robots. I don't care what Rogue Trader era fluff said, it's since been rewritten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Also has anyone considered why a Nemesis Dreadknight would be needed or used instead of a dreadnought? Why have both? Whats the point? Seems entirely redundant. In order to get into a dread you have to be a hairsbreath away from death, and crippled. In order to get into a Dreadknight you just have to climb in. Dreads allow a dying warrior to fight on, dreadknights make your living warriors more effective. Very different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Fisting Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Did you want GW to give the GK a version of the furioso? Yes, the back story for the Furioso at least makes sense. Where has the Nemesis Dreadknight been all this time? Did they use it during the Heresy? Is it difficult to maintain like a dreadnought? Can regular space maring units get them too under special circumstances? Wjhy does the driver wear Terminator armour? The whole idea of the thing is stupid. This weapon just comes out of nowhere as an unknown Deamon killing machine. I'll say it again, its LAME. Also don't compare it to the stormraven, or rhino variants becuase at least they look like progressive improvements over previous models. What the Nemesis Dreadknight based on in the STC? A dreadnought, a penitent engine, or a warhound? Who knows. So in the grand scheme of the 40k universe, the best super soldiers in the galaxy need power armor, but wait if they run into something tough they need Terminator armor, but if they die they can become uber dreadnought, but if they run into something really tough they can don Nemesis Dreadknight armour, but if its even tought they can call in a Warhound. Never ending grades of upgrades is a really stupid concept for 40k armies and thats exactly what this is. Also pluging in one "super-suit" into another seems more like a Tau thing than an Astartes thing in the grand sceme of things. To give something to the positive side, I most definately would have liked this better as a special adeptus mechanicus unit. At least with them I can say, "well they don't have many of them and the AdepMech have access to stuff space marines don't" In that army they would be one offs. Yes, I know Grey knights are rare, but would they really use this instead of a Dreadnought Furioso. Its just one more unhead of STC device to maintian and worship. So, essentially what you are saying is GW should never add any new vehicles, characters, or rules to the game unless we are already aware of them, thus letting the game become stale and repetitive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momosgarage Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Dreadnoughts are Vehicles, Greater Daemons are Monstrous Creatures, and as we all know Monstrous Creatures penetrate Vehicle armor really easily! It's just not a fair fight! Monstrous Creatures are needed to fight Monstrous Creatures! They don't have enough variants to take care of this? Venerable Dreadnought Siege Dreadnought Ironclad Dreadnought Hellfire Dreadnought Furioso Dreadnought Death Company Dreadnought Mortis Dreadnought In order to get into a dread you have to be a hairsbreath away from death, and crippled.In order to get into a Dreadknight you just have to climb in. Dreads allow a dying warrior to fight on, dreadknights make your living warriors more effective. Very different things. I was talking about their role in Battle. They have the same job when the shooting starts. If robots were fine then Space Marines would have droids instead of servitors and serfs, battlebots instead of dreads and the AdMech would have robo-warriors instead of skitarii. The Imperium, as it is written now, does not use robots. I don't care what Rogue Trader era fluff said, it's since been rewritten. I answered this already, where were you? Why couldn't the "new" Imperial Robots be suped-up servitors? Besides couldn't an imperial robot be controlled by a tech priest on the battlefield. (Haven't seen those in ages either) Imperial robots are are not "Iron Men". The Adeptus Mechicus specifically forbids the manufacture of "Iron-Men", not robots. If that were the case there would be no machine spirits, servo skulls or servitors. These noted "robots" have vat grown brains to serve as hardware. Where do you draw the line and how does that relate to robots? It certainly isn't clarified in the fluff of any period. The above is NOT from Rogue Trader. So, essentially what you are saying is GW should never add any new vehicles, characters, or rules to the game unless we are already aware of them, thus letting the game become stale and repetitive? We can disagree, that is fine. But if you don't see that this idea is stupid and poorly thought out I can't help you. There were many other far more interesting things that could have been made into units for GK's (jetbikes, imperial robots, militia, etc). I have seen much better amateur ideas on the modeling forum of the B&C. It took them all of 5 minutes to come up with this. I wish I could get paid for ideas like this. Anyone here can do better. Do you really think the team that made this half-arsed kitbash unit should have gotten paid for the end product? I don't. When stuff like this pops up I lose my ability to suspend disbelief, but hey I'm old. I never said I don't like new units. It looks like its easier for some younger folks to get excited about low quality stuff, which this clearly is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Fisting Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Dreadnoughts are Vehicles, Greater Daemons are Monstrous Creatures, and as we all know Monstrous Creatures penetrate Vehicle armor really easily! It's just not a fair fight! Monstrous Creatures are needed to fight Monstrous Creatures! They don't have enough variants to take care of this? Venerable Dreadnought Siege Dreadnought Ironclad Dreadnought Hellfire Dreadnought Furioso Dreadnought Death Company Dreadnought Mortis Dreadnought In order to get into a dread you have to be a hairsbreath away from death, and crippled.In order to get into a Dreadknight you just have to climb in. Dreads allow a dying warrior to fight on, dreadknights make your living warriors more effective. Very different things. I was talking about their role in Battle. They have the same job when the shooting starts. If robots were fine then Space Marines would have droids instead of servitors and serfs, battlebots instead of dreads and the AdMech would have robo-warriors instead of skitarii. The Imperium, as it is written now, does not use robots. I don't care what Rogue Trader era fluff said, it's since been rewritten. I answered this already, where were you? Why couldn't the "new" Imperial Robots be suped-up servitors? Besides couldn't an imperial robot be controlled by a tech priest on the battlefield. (Haven't seen those in ages either) Imperial robots are are not "Iron Men". The Adeptus Mechicus specifically forbids the manufacture of "Iron-Men", not robots. If that were the case there would be no machine spirits, servo skulls or servitors. These noted "robots" have vat grown brains to serve as hardware. Where do you draw the line and how does that relate to robots? It certainly isn't clarified in the fluff of any period. The above is not from Rogue Trader. Alright, dude, the Imperium views things with a very darkage mindset. "Iron Men" is their term for robot. ie: An artificially intelligent robo-man, having no humanity. A droid, an android, a robot, etc. A servitor is NOT a robot, as it has a human body, brain, etc, making it a cyborg. Where do you draw the line? Simple: It must have a human brain! Also, "machine spirit" is old AI within certain vehicles, and mankind has just lost so much understanding of technology that they refer to said AI as the machine's spirit. NO ROBOTS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raven guard 1369 Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share Posted March 10, 2011 Do you not like the rules you've seen or the actual model or just the whole concept? Yes the model looks like someone on this website put a termie in a penitent engine and gave it giants swords. But if someone on the B&C did it they would probably recieve praise for such a cool idea. GW does it and it's garbage? The rules for it make sense too IMO. And if GW didn't create new models and retcon old stuff we'd probably be calling the game Roge Trader. 1st edition. And the universe wouldn't fluff out to the one we know and love and hate. While my first reaction was wow where did this come from i've downgraded to man I hope they got this thing well tested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyaenidae Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 I think I figured it out. The AdMech reverse-engineered a tau battlesuit, and 'Imperium-ified' it... ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momosgarage Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Do you not like the rules you've seen or the actual model or just the whole concept? Thanks for trying to clarify. You are right, I do not like the model nor the concept. I do however think there is a place for a unit in GK's with these stats and rules. However, the execution of the unit and concepts is CRAP and likely lifted right off the B&C. Alright, dude, the Imperium views things with a very darkage mindset. "Iron Men" is their term for robot. ie: An artificially intelligent robo-man, having no humanity. A droid, an android, a robot, etc. A servitor is NOT a robot, as it has a human body, brain, etc, making it a cyborg. Where do you draw the line? Simple: It must have a human brain! Also, "machine spirit" is old AI within certain vehicles, and mankind has just lost so much understanding of technology that they refer to said AI as the machine's spirit. NO ROBOTS!!! Alright dude, feel free to start citing some sources. I own all the books, back to Rogue Trader. War Robots in the rules were NOT artificially intelligent. There is a distinction between "Iron-men" and "War Robots" in all fluff, even up to the current stuff. Units of imperial robots were controlled by Tech Priest, if the tech priest died the unit just repeated the last set of instructions. There is nothing in the new or old fluff saying the Legio Cybernetica has been disbanded, nor does it outline some of what you have said. You have added in your own details. The fluff doesn't say that the Imperial Robots are NOT servitors. They may or may not be. Its simply not clarified to the level of detail you are claiming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquid_awesomes Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Dreadnoughts are Vehicles, Greater Daemons are Monstrous Creatures, and as we all know Monstrous Creatures penetrate Vehicle armor really easily! It's just not a fair fight! Monstrous Creatures are needed to fight Monstrous Creatures! They don't have enough variants to take care of this? Venerable Dreadnought Siege Dreadnought Ironclad Dreadnought Hellfire Dreadnought Furioso Dreadnought Death Company Dreadnought Mortis Dreadnought Have you ever tried to fight an ork warboss with any of the above? You make one, maybe two wounds, then they rip you apart with their 6 S9 power claw attacks. At least now you can't have both your CCWs destroyed and be left kicking things to death. I like the idea of the dreadknight, just not the model. If you don't like it, play without it, but i know im getting one. EDIT: It took them all of 5 minutes to come up with this. I wish I could get paid for ideas like this. Anyone here can do better. Do you really think the team that made this half-arsed kitbash unit should have gotten paid for the end product? I don't. I really think you are being immature with your view here. Im sure allot more thought and development time went into this that you are saying, several months at least. If someone here had done this, it would have been a labour of love, and we would be praising them and asking for tutorials and step-by-step guides, but suddenly because GW made it, its ;) and you say they spent no time on it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Fisting Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 Do you not like the rules you've seen or the actual model or just the whole concept? Thanks for trying to clarify. You are right, I do not like the model nor the concept. I do however think there is a place for a unit in GK's with these stats and rules. However, the execution of the unit and concepts is CRAP and likely lifted right off the B&C. Alright, dude, the Imperium views things with a very darkage mindset. "Iron Men" is their term for robot. ie: An artificially intelligent robo-man, having no humanity. A droid, an android, a robot, etc. A servitor is NOT a robot, as it has a human body, brain, etc, making it a cyborg. Where do you draw the line? Simple: It must have a human brain! Also, "machine spirit" is old AI within certain vehicles, and mankind has just lost so much understanding of technology that they refer to said AI as the machine's spirit. NO ROBOTS!!! Alright dude, feel free to start citing some sources. I own all the books, back to Rogue Trader. War Robots in the rules were NOT artificially intelligent. There is a distinction between "Iron-men" and "War Robots" in all fluff, even up to the current stuff. Units of imperial robots were controlled by Tech Priest, if the tech priest died the unit just repeated the last set of instructions. There is nothing in the new or old fluff saying the Legio Cybernetica has been disbanded, nor does it outline some of what you have said. You have added in your own details. The fluff doesn't say that the Imperial Robots are NOT servitors. They may or may not be. Its simply not clarified to the level of detail you are claiming. My point is, the Imperium doesn't use robots as we know them, as in say ED-209 from Robocop, but would use a Robocop as he has a human brain, like a servitor. Servitors are not robots. They are cyborgs. I never said the Legio Cybernetica was disbanded, I said the Imperium does not use pure "machine men" for lack of a better term. Show me where it says they do. If "Imperial Robot" is just another name for servitor that's fine, I'm saying they don't use robots as we know them. They use cyborgs, part man, part machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momosgarage Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 I said the Imperium does not use pure "machine men" for lack of a better term. Show me where it says they do. Thats my point. Imperial Robots/War robots were never identified as "machine men". "Imperial Robots/War robots" clearly are not the banned intelligent machines listed in all fluff. The timelines of the "iron men" ban and times when "Imperial Robots/War robots" were used don't jive. The whole "iron men" ban thing happened way before the existence of the Legio Cybernetica, otherwise Space Marine chapters could have never "inducted" "Imperial Robots/War robots" into their chapters, which they did. They were walking guns and hammers with a Tech Priest in control. There were also pictures of their innards, which appeared gooey, not circuit boards. Just because the outside is metal doesn't mean the insiders are. Is a dreadnaught a robot? It sure looks like one. We both know it is not. Have you ever tried to fight an ork warboss with any of the above? You make one, maybe two wounds, then they rip you apart with their 6 S9 power claw attacks. At least now you can't have both your CCWs destroyed and be left kicking things to death. As if they couldn't have beefed up the GK dreadnought stats. Bjorn fell handed is better than the above and does not have a standard stat line. So in the 40K universe Bjorn fell handed is more powerful than a GK dreadnought? Im sure allot more thought and development time went into this that you are saying, several months at least. If someone here had done this, it would have been a labour of love, and we would be praising them and asking for tutorials and step-by-step guides, but suddenly because GW made it, its and you say they spent no time on it at all. Did you see my earlier post. I am fairly certain that no one from the inside has ever given insight to the designers working condition's since early 4th edition. When Andy and his type left, the peaks behind the curtain ceased. Yes, development time should be several months for a whole codex, but I can't believe that THIS UNIT took any time at all to come up with. In fact it was likely the last rushed thing they threw in to meet the deadline. The work on THIS UNIT is clearly shoddy and quite obviously so. I guess your standards are low for what should be creatively driven end product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingsOfTheFalcon Posted March 10, 2011 Share Posted March 10, 2011 While I have no intention of starting with GK's, this kit has some great potential for other conversions. Old school Epic fans will see what I mean.. http://i89.servimg.com/u/f89/12/99/98/55/photo_31.jpg Absolutely, just need to build a suitable chainsaw arm, cannon and cockpit, instant Knight Titan. Finally a way to do Knight Households for Apocalypse.. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HunterEste Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 I'm trying very hard to like it, but it just seems out of place somehow. It might be because I can't look at it and not think it to be some crazy child of the power loader from Aliens and those mecha from Avatar. I'll withhold judgment on it until I get to see one in person. It could be a much nice looking model IRL and on the tabletop next to the other pieces of the army than it looks by itself in the advanced order photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decoy Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Aye... I'm... really not liking it for most of the reasons listed prior. It just seems like GW is grasping for straws now. Not only is it ugly in my eyes, but it doesn't seem to fit the army at all. Never mind that I'd laugh outright if someone plopped one down on the table in front of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HunterEste Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Ah-ha! I finally remembered what late 80s-early 90s cartoon this reminded me of. Exo-Squad! :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyaenidae Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Ah-ha! I finally remembered what late 80s-early 90s cartoon this reminded me of. Exo-Squad! :P Oh, damn! +1 man, good call! And on top of that, the neo-humans kinda look like tau! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asfargone Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 now this is going to piss off or confuse some, but there does seem to be a real advantage here. dreadnoughts piss me off, imperial VA/barnsides. those things are pretty much assault tanks with horrible ranged weaponry. fix it? where? too damn slow and scouts die in a pinch. titans have a scale problem, and as such simply destroy any given planet they fight on. titans however, have the straight-up firepower to make the difference. try a gundam perhaps? limited high-performance capability so it can make an attack without getting stuck in a crapshoot, or fight 1v1 against an avatar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine God Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 It's obvious why the Grey Knights of Titan need something more than their Ancient Dreadnoughts to take on Greater Daemons and Daemon Princes! Dreadnoughts are Vehicles, Greater Daemons are Monstrous Creatures, and as we all know Monstrous Creatures penetrate Vehicle armor really easily! It's just not a fair fight! Monstrous Creatures are needed to fight Monstrous Creatures! Oh wait, there went Rules Limitations, jumping into the fluff again... Well, hmm... Methinks GW have been looking at old B&C Threads on Dreadnoughts as MC again and finally worked it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andurin Marvak Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Ah-ha! I finally remembered what late 80s-early 90s cartoon this reminded me of. Exo-Squad! :) Oh, damn! +1 man, good call! And on top of that, the neo-humans kinda look like tau! Except they're way taller and stronger and might actually be able to look an Astartes in the eye. Honestly, I have no problem with the rules they come up with and all that, but, the design is just awful. I don't like the slenderness of the limbs, it looks far too easy to just linebacker into with your Bloodthirster/Great Unclean One, and then leave it flailing on the ground the rest of the battle. That said, were the frame itself bulked up and some kind of cockpit put in place, I really wouldn't mind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine God Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Also has anyone considered why a Nemesis Dreadknight would be needed or used instead of a dreadnought? Why have both? Whats the point? Seems entirely redundant. In order to get into a dread you have to be a hairsbreath away from death, and crippled. In order to get into a Dreadknight you just have to climb in. Dreads allow a dying warrior to fight on, dreadknights make your living warriors more effective. Very different things. Well what a Retcon. GW release the Dreadknight for the Grey Knights, an Aliens Power-Suit/Waldo. Grey Knights get the Rogue Trader Dreadnought we haven't been able to field since 2nd Edition! Rogue Trader Fluff: Pilots of Dreadnoughts did not have to be near crippled / death to be interred in a Dreadnought! They could enter and later leave said vehicle, however the stresses of being integrated in a Dreadnought caused their Pilots to loose stats when the got out, thus many stayed in their suits for long periods of time. Space Marines get a near death / crippled applicant interred in a stunted Walker barely 0.75 X the height of a Space Marine, Grey Knights get a proper 3 x Space Marine height Dreadnought analogue! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FerociousBeast Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Dreadnoughts are Vehicles, Greater Daemons are Monstrous Creatures, and as we all know Monstrous Creatures penetrate Vehicle armor really easily! It's just not a fair fight! Monstrous Creatures are needed to fight Monstrous Creatures! They don't have enough variants to take care of this? Venerable Dreadnought Siege Dreadnought Ironclad Dreadnought Hellfire Dreadnought Furioso Dreadnought Death Company Dreadnought Mortis Dreadnought I think you're misunderstanding the point I'm trying to make :) To stop being so damn subtle all the time and just say what I mean: due to the disadvantage vehicles have against monstrous creatures in the rules, it appears that GW has decided to make the dreadknight a monstrous creature when it's clearly a vehicle, just like the dreadnought that they should have used in this role but apparently felt that they couldn't because of Rules Limitations. Thus, "Rules Limitations jumping into the fluff again!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sons of Horus Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 no matter how I look at it I just do not like the model at all. There's something about its design that doesn't seem 40k-ish or at least Imperial. It seems as though GW has been going for a specific look in the recent years for most of its models and I just don't find it appealing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.