Discussion on the Impulsor

[Panzer]

It being silly is not really an argument. Nobody ever debated that. It's an artificial separation of the new and old model range. That's all.

[CaptainMarsh]

Sadly, the Impulsor doesn't work with how I run my Chapter. If it could carry Gravis I would get at least 3.

[BitsHammer]

Do people ever just houserule that primaris use normal marine transports? If Magnus could use a land raider in the heresy, it seems silly smaller marines couldn't.

Magnus could shrink though.

[Ishagu]

So it costs a bit more than a Razorback. Is that really a deal breaker? I guess if people were planning on buying 6 or something...

[Borbarad]

People love the Rhino and Landraider but hate the Impulsor and Repulsor?

They are so, so similar, visually. I smell unfair bias.

Not sure what vehicles you are looking at. One peoples main gripes with Impulsor / Repulsor is the ridiculous amount of rocket pods and other weaponry. Also the introduction of the clumsy stubber as a marine weapon. None of this is present on the rhino / raider.

[Panzer]

 

People love the Rhino and Landraider but hate the Impulsor and Repulsor?

They are so, so similar, visually. I smell unfair bias.

Not sure what vehicles you are looking at. One peoples main gripes with Impulsor / Repulsor is the ridiculous amount of rocket pods and other weaponry. Also the introduction of the clumsy stubber as a marine weapon. None of this is present on the rhino / raider.

 

 

To be fair, the Impulsor isn't overloaded with weapons and if you don't like stubbers in the marine range (which I can agree on) you don't have to add one from what I could see. Just go for the Orbital Bombardement array, shield thingy, or the missiles. The sponsons are stormbolters anyway.

[Shinespider]

The terrible truth of the Stubbers is that all pintle weapons have always looked terrible. The storm bolters were just easier to ignore because they're small.

 

Pintle weapons are bad. Death to pintle weapons.  

[Hellebras]

Oof. I'll still need to get two to finish filling out my 8.5 list, but that's steep and my income's a bit limited right this moment. Gives me more time to finish painting everything else, I guess.

[Red_Shift]

I hadn't realised how small it is, that does change my mental arithmetic about buying one. Especially at that price point. The open bay t the back just makes me think how cool it would look with he central chassis rebuilt into a giant earthshaker style cannon

[Marshal Rohr]

The terrible truth of the Stubbers is that all pintle weapons have always looked terrible. The storm bolters were just easier to ignore because they're small.

 

Pintle weapons are bad. Death to pintle weapons.

Do you mean aesthetically? A tanks machines guns are the most important weapon it has. Edited October 14, 2019 by Marshal Rohr

[Kenzaburo]

 

 

People love the Rhino and Landraider but hate the Impulsor and Repulsor?

They are so, so similar, visually. I smell unfair bias.

Not sure what vehicles you are looking at. One peoples main gripes with Impulsor / Repulsor is the ridiculous amount of rocket pods and other weaponry. Also the introduction of the clumsy stubber as a marine weapon. None of this is present on the rhino / raider.

 

 

To be fair, the Impulsor isn't overloaded with weapons and if you don't like stubbers in the marine range (which I can agree on) you don't have to add one from what I could see. Just go for the Orbital Bombardement array, shield thingy, or the missiles. The sponsons are stormbolters anyway.

 

 

might not be overloaded with weapons, but having that weird open-topped compartment in the back isn't exactly helping either.

 

On the topic on those new tanks looking so similar to the Rhino and LR - well, there's that thing with them flying instead of having tracks. I'm just not down with that - it takes some of the brutality of the old models' looks out of the design. When I think Astartes, I don't think floaty tanks, I think treads crunching through a ravaged battlescape. I don't think of the whirring staccato of stubbers but the loud and fast bang of bolters.

 

On topic-topic: I really don't like the impulsor design. I wasn't down with the repulsor before, but AT LEAST it was a floaty tank. This is some weird APC, that not only floats but some nutter cracked the protective crew compartment open so Astartes get to show their bling like they are parading down sunset strip...#notmykindatank

[Blindhamster]

 

 

 

People love the Rhino and Landraider but hate the Impulsor and Repulsor?

They are so, so similar, visually. I smell unfair bias.

Not sure what vehicles you are looking at. One peoples main gripes with Impulsor / Repulsor is the ridiculous amount of rocket pods and other weaponry. Also the introduction of the clumsy stubber as a marine weapon. None of this is present on the rhino / raider.

 

 

To be fair, the Impulsor isn't overloaded with weapons and if you don't like stubbers in the marine range (which I can agree on) you don't have to add one from what I could see. Just go for the Orbital Bombardement array, shield thingy, or the missiles. The sponsons are stormbolters anyway.

 

 

might not be overloaded with weapons, but having that weird open-topped compartment in the back isn't exactly helping either.

 

On the topic on those new tanks looking so similar to the Rhino and LR - well, there's that thing with them flying instead of having tracks. I'm just not down with that - it takes some of the brutality of the old models' looks out of the design. When I think Astartes, I don't think floaty tanks, I think treads crunching through a ravaged battlescape. I don't think of the whirring staccato of stubbers but the loud and fast bang of bolters.

 

On topic-topic: I really don't like the impulsor design. I wasn't down with the repulsor before, but AT LEAST it was a floaty tank. This is some weird APC, that not only floats but some nutter cracked the protective crew compartment open so Astartes get to show their bling like they are parading down sunset strip...#notmykindatank

 

 

when i think marines, i think surgical strikes into key locations. Tanks in general always feel a little out of place for marines. During the legion days they made sense, but the simple fact is marines just don't have the numbers for all out wars without some pretty impressive leaps of logic - or multiple chapters coming together. Thats what the guard are for.

 

When i think tracks, i think guard, tracks are just so low-tech and mass produced that they only ever really made sense for guard.

 

probably why i've never owned too many marine tanks.

[Ishagu]

We know from the lore that there is massive disparity in technology across different aspects of thr Imperium.

 

A Horse drawn cart can exist alongside personal teleporters.

 

The hover tech used in Primaris tanks really sets them apart from more common Imperium forces like the Astra Militarum. And it fits them more, as mentioned above. Astartes are rapid response, they can't be getting slowed down by uneven terrain, for example.

[Bryan Blaire]

The funny part of "treads crunching through a ravaged battlescape" vs. the "floaty tank" is that the floaty tank does as much, if not more, damage to the ground than the treads would. The anti-grav system is punching the ground to stay afloat and churning the earth beneath the vehicle, as opposed to just the treads. The anti-grav wave can crush enemies and friends beneath it - that by itself is pretty grim-dark. The anti-grav tech probably helps with insertion as well, the Thunderhawks may not be in quite as much danger to drop them in place rather than having to set down to disconnect the carrying cradles with treads on the ground.

 

The forceful anti-grav seems much more Marine to me.

[wildweasel]

The funny part of "treads crunching through a ravaged battlescape" vs. the "floaty tank" is that the floaty tank does as much, if not more, damage to the ground than the treads would. The anti-grav system is punching the ground to stay afloat and churning the earth beneath the vehicle, as opposed to just the treads. The anti-grav wave can crush enemies and friends beneath it - that by itself is pretty grim-dark. The anti-grav tech probably helps with insertion as well, the Thunderhawks may not be in quite as much danger to drop them in place rather than having to set down to disconnect the carrying cradles with treads on the ground.

 

The forceful anti-grav seems much more Marine to me.

This is by far my favorite aspect of the Primaris tanks. “So what the Imperium suddenly has a bunch of new anti-grav all of a sudden lol??” Yeah they do - janky anti-grav that would be impractical for a lot of other uses and can be an issue when you accidentally drive over like some supplies or such by mistake.

 

Plus it makes the Travelled grognard in me happy

[jaxom]

If I recall correctly from Dark Imperium, the repulsors are supposed to replace drop pods; getting dropped from low orbit with squads inside.

[Ishagu]

Yeah they are described as falling from the sky like bricks, and they slow as they approach the ground. They even cause a sonic boom as they plummet.

 

The mental image of a giant, armoured tank plummeting from the sky and slowing to a stop above the ground is very cool.

Edited October 15, 2019 by Ishagu

[Boyadventurer]

The funny part of "treads crunching through a ravaged battlescape" vs. the "floaty tank" is that the floaty tank does as much, if not more, damage to the ground than the treads would. The anti-grav system is punching the ground to stay afloat and churning the earth beneath the vehicle, as opposed to just the treads. The anti-grav wave can crush enemies and friends beneath it - that by itself is pretty grim-dark. The anti-grav tech probably helps with insertion as well, the Thunderhawks may not be in quite as much danger to drop them in place rather than having to set down to disconnect the carrying cradles with treads on the ground.

 

The forceful anti-grav seems much more Marine to me.

So you mean they can't just balance on a ruined wall 3 stories up?

[War Angel]

Yeah they see described as falling from the sky like bricks, and they slow as they approach the ground. They even cause a sonic boom as they plummet.

The mental image of a giant, armoured tank plummeting from the sky and slowing to a stop above the ground is very cool.

Damn that’s a powerful thought.

[wildweasel]

 

 

The funny part of "treads crunching through a ravaged battlescape" vs. the "floaty tank" is that the floaty tank does as much, if not more, damage to the ground than the treads would. The anti-grav system is punching the ground to stay afloat and churning the earth beneath the vehicle, as opposed to just the treads. The anti-grav wave can crush enemies and friends beneath it - that by itself is pretty grim-dark. The anti-grav tech probably helps with insertion as well, the Thunderhawks may not be in quite as much danger to drop them in place rather than having to set down to disconnect the carrying cradles with treads on the ground.

 

The forceful anti-grav seems much more Marine to me.

So you mean they can't just balance on a ruined wall 3 stories up?

Honestly them losing FLY and just having a rule to Fall Back and shoot normally would fit their fluff a lot better.

[Ishagu]

The fly rule is good for them. Don't let certain tournament gaming paint a bad impression for you.

 

I've personally never placed them on some narrow, rickety ruins.

Edited October 14, 2019 by Ishagu

[wildweasel]

I’m not.

[chapter master 454]

The rubble of tread, I like my battlefield well churned with the remains of my enemies. Not some freshly pressed clothes!

 

To me, the whole "anti-grav" regardless of lore creates the illusion of a lighter tank, after all it can't hover unless its light in some form (no matter the lore) and to pair that off, what vehicles have we seen in the past be anti-grav: Light, fast recon vehicles or the like of the eldar sleek and light vessels.

 

To me, if the repulsor was treaded, it would of had a big yes from me.

 

However now, GW are just laying it on. "Replace drop pods"...um...ok so yes, a big brick of metal coming down is kinda cool but I mean...personally I find the image of orbiting ships FIRING large bullet like projectiles at the planet surface that slam with force enough to crush tanks, then fire open and before the smoke clears there bolt fire, melta fire, plasma fire too, swords and bayonets thrusting through!

 

Again, just some overglorifying of the primaris stuff by GW and its fairly transparent. It feels bad too.

 

Primaris are cool, the models do look good imo (I know, not everyone likes them but then again I was a weird one, I liked centurions the first time I saw them) however the lore sucks. Sorry, but to me the Land Raider will forever be a superior showing of marine armoured might and the drop pod the superior icon of what we do: we are the emperor's angels of death bore to battle on wings of fire!

 

(Not wishy washy anti-grav pointy earred nonsense!)

[BitsHammer]

Eldar grav is whisper quiet and gentle as a feather. Imperial grav is as blunt and subtle as a monster truck made out of construction equipment. The idea that it's "light" is laughable and this insistance that it's ability to float is somehow against the status quo of the Imperium.

 

You know, the same Imperium who makes airplanes out of cinder blocks that fall faster forward than they do down? The Imperium brute forcing the ability to stay ofd the ground is more on brand than the big pauldrons.

[wildweasel]

Astartes fliers incorporate some anti-grav (of the classic style). GW was explicit about this with the Stormwolf, but over all it makes sense for craft that are designed for vacuum and trans atmospheric operation. Wings aren’t anything other that surfaces to stick weapons and get shot at on in vacuum, but as a hybrid craft you’ll want at least some wing surface for stability and maneuver in atmosphere. Different designs clearly incorporate different amounts of anti-grav, but none have enough for that to counter their mass entirely, like a Land Speeder does. Edited October 15, 2019 by wildweasel