PDA

View Full Version : Real World Imperial Guard Army



Captain Jeffrey
06-04-2008, 11:02
Hey, all, it's been ages since I posted (it's seriously been more than a year.)

Anyway, I've got news, just for kicks- I started Imperial Guard about 3 months ago.

This seriously is, probably, now, my favorite army to play as in Warhammer 40,000.

I have "real world" tanks in my army and I am currently playing under the Armored Company PDF from Games Workshop's webpage. It's a pretty solid list, and I started it not for the gaming effects but for it's flair. That, and I was using it to play 1500-2000 point games without having to flood the board with infantry (seriously, IG will cost you the most dollars of any current 40K list to my knowledge.)

Why?

I'm playing as, pretty much, a blatant tribute to the Russian Army. That's Mechanized Infantry (real world) and Armored Company (40K's lingo) if anybody ever said it. That, and it's just so much more fun to be the USA's nemesis and to be "The Bad Guy". Where the Red Army literally freaked out NATO.

During the Cold War, I read in one of my books, and from FAS.org's analysis, that circa 1985 the Soviet Union had over 50,000 armored personnel carriers, essentially loads of BMPs and BTRs, and over 30,000 Main Battle Tanks. It was also spending 40% of its GDP on the military (admitted years later by Gorbyachev after the collapse and reformation into the CIS and the Russian Federation.)

Talk about a way to break your country's economy. That is absolutely obscene defense budget spending. (A whole ton of it also never used.)

(Short, editorial/brief history note- is Iraq doing the same to the US? -probably not as bad, but it's going to make the quality of life for American John Q. Taxpayer a lot worse- Billions of dollars in equipment loss (main battle tanks destroyed/disabled, Humvees destroyed, APCs destroyed/disabled, some extremely expensive aircraft lost through pilot error or rocket fire, etc.) (and you also can't put a dollar value on limbs blown off), and extremely high wartime costs, coupled with, for some reason, low taxes, causing us to borrow heavily from PR China, which is now eating up our Treasury Bonds by the hundreds of billions? "Recession" is all over the news here. Maybe. And no end in sight.) Anyway-

Today the Russian Army is *much* smaller (probably because of concern more over internal affairs and the economy rather than a full-scale war), but all that stuff is still in a warehouse somewhere- 40,000 *declared* metric tons of Sarin/VX/Chemical Choking/Blistering agents, thousands of tanks, hundreds of submarines, and thousands of nukes and ICBMs don't just disappear.

If you like history, pick that book up "A Brief History of the Cold War", which was by a NATO colonel from the UK.

I didn't know that Stalin had been laying in his bedroom, victim of a stroke, for days, before government agents at the dacha checked on him and found him, literally, a complete vegetable. :wtf: Talk about *eerie*. There sure is a ton of stuff the American history books in grade school were not telling me. Anyway-

Most of my foot troops are Valhallans (yes, really, REALLY- all the archive minis, where I wheefully said after ordering $175 worth of stuff from GW- "Hooray for $175 of figures, for about 300 points worth of soldiers"), and I am working towards getting a "standard" Imperial Guard list put together.

I don't need the Imperial Guard Codex itself, because, actually... if you look at it, the PDF Armored Company is almost a *free* version of a 40K Codex if I ever saw one (I also have the 3rd Ed. Rulebook, which has "free" Codex books in it, well, generic ones, and I use that for the points for Colonels, etc. which have essentially not changed.)

(Why- I don't like spending $25 on an unnecessary 20 page leaflet, where comparative books/magazines sell for half or less the price.)

Anyway, I do have "real world" tanks in my army.

Just put "Kitech" or "Zhengdefu" in a Google search and you'll get what I'm talking about. I got every single one off of Ebay auctions, all of which were absolute steals (there isn't much demand for miniature models.)

I tried to order directly from a merchant in China, but the USPS totally freaked out and shipped it all back to mainland P.R China, which pissed me off, costing me about $60 in shipping. Luckily the Chinese man was a very good seller and refunded my purchase price- though we were both out the shipping costs. Hilariously, the shipping was more than what the models (about 10) totally costed.

It was back last summer during that ludicrous "lead paint/toys" scare in the American media (I'm not going to lick my T-80s...)

In reality I just think Customs was scared of me directly buying from Communists. ;) (hey, isn't that what Wal-Mart here in the USA is for? Talk about nothing but Chinese imports. (I used to even work there.) :)

Here's what I got-

2x T-80 Main Battle Tank (Russian)
2x M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank (American)
1x T-72 Main Battle Tank (I use that as my Company Commander) (Russian)
2x AMX-30 Medium Battle Tanks (French), converted slightly into T-62's (Russian) (as FAS.org says, rightfully, under AMX-30, "Often mistaken for T-62". Seriously, those older French and Soviet tanks are almost *identical* in appearance and probably combat, minus the AMX has a 105mm and the T-62 a, IIRC, 115mm.)

-All those are my Leman Russes.

3x M3 Bradley APC (American)
3x BTR-90 APC (one has an SA-7 SAM and the other two have AT-5 Spygots) (Russian)
1x Marder APC (German)

-All those are my Chimeras.

All look absolutely stellar. Kitech and Zhengdefu make MUCH better model tanks than anything GW makes, and they look much better.

Okay, the plastic is a little lower quality, but it's pretty solid, and totally worth it.

Third-

What's the best? THE PRICE!!

These models, seriously, I got them all for about $8 American each. $8 compared to the Leman Russ equivalent GW sells ($45)? (You do the math.)

Yes, though in these dealings, these technically support a Chinese company under Communism. But hell, they're cheap and are excellent! I go with whoever sells stuff the chepest for the best quality.

Fourth-

They're motorized! If I put two AA batteries in them, they will actually move across the gaming table (I also, for kicks, when one of my tanks gets destroyed, I turn the switch to "OFF". :D ) Too bad that if they run your Orks over, those don't count as actual kills.

Fifth-

They're excellent models. The T-80 and T-72 with those 125mms look absolutely amazing. The awesome thing I like about those ones best is about 50% of the tank is the *gun*.

In terms of size, they're all 1/48 scale and are the size of GW models. In actuality, they are longer than a Leman Russ, but are shorter in height (though height, rules-wise, makes no difference anymore in 40K.)

Sixth-

Though I wouldn't even think of trying to put these in a Grand Tourney if I ever did participate in one (which are corporate GW events, hense why only GW models are allowed), as the only GW tank in the entire army is one Basilisk, most of my peanut gallery reception has been *extremely* positive.

I get a lot of "WHERE DID YOU GET THESE?!?" (excited) and "WOW... cool..." reactions.

In terms of gaming, zero disputes. Most people know what the T-80 or Abrams are (they are Leman Russes) without even asking. I play in a group anyway where everybody knows each other. Heck, they're larger (as in longer) than the Leman Russ. They're therefore easier to fire at and see!

Last (seventh)-

Battle-wise? This army has a relatively impressive track record. I don't keep count of my wins/losses, but it's won a lot more games than lost (I'd say about a 70% win percentage. To my estimates, my Tyranids are 90%- I have no idea why- my Blood Angels are about 55%, my Dark Angels about 55%, and my Craftworld Eldar about 40%.)

I do think my long-time experience in the hobby (11+ years, starting in 2nd Ed. when I was 14,) attributes to that more than the rules or "effectiveness", though.

Hilariously, and probably ironically, in true Russian Army doctrine fashion, almost all of my ground troops die in every single game. Where I throw everything at you (heck, my troops tend to usually move!), inflict a lot of casualties, and then die out completely as I overweigh you with just bodies.

It is almost always my tanks that inflict massive casualties ("Hit"s on the Scatter Dice make everyone moan in pain,) and are still functional at the end.

I'm also going gung-ho on the paint scheme, though it's still W-I-P. I've been looking at Second Chechen War pics (WARNING- if you do, they are all **extremely** depressing,) and are trying to make my army look as dingy, dirty, and war-weary as possible. Black ink on the face after the flesh color has been a very simple way for me to represent soot-colored faces, which a lot of those Russian troops in those pictures have. That, and I've figured out how to do finally do camo.

I'm also working on an appropriate VDR (Vehicle Design Rules) out of Chapter Approved for another model in 1/48 that I have (by Revell), an Mi-24 Hind-D (a Russian attack chopper), which, in reality, weighs 28,000 pounds and is among the world's most heavily armed and armored gunships.

My friend's comment, from an e-mail-

"Skimmer, one Assault Cannon, four Missile Launchers, and troop carrying capacity 10? After watching that YouTube video of the Hind-D, I think that what you're putting on it rules-wise may be a bit light!!"

It takes time, but, in the end, I think my Imperial Guard army will look better than my Tyranids, which I spent oodles of time on.

(To hell with the Space Marine shiny color scheme with most chapter colors that scream, 'Hey! Shoot at me!')

Anyway, I guess, to close-

For the Guard? For the Emperor?

One of my buddies at the club also has an entire army of Kriegan Death Korps (yes, really.) We are planning a German vs. Russian army fight at some point, after I get everything painted. Maybe we'll try and re-enact some Stalingrad fights (aka "the bloodiest battle ever in human history".)

He just laughed when I said, "Want to throw in 'Preferred Enemy' for every single unit on the battlefield, to represent how absolutely ugly the Eastern Front was?"

Should be fun. Anyway, that's the 40K'ing in there for my first post back in ages.

Thankfully Warhammer 40,000 is a fun, pretty comical wargame. Because in reality, there's nothing glorious, fun, or fantastic about warfare. It's when all of humanity's worst emotions surface. It's ugly. And nobody "wins".

Somewhat on topic, and you may find it entertaining-

Poster advertisement/back of the video game box of "Super Conflict", an SNES game (considered the prequel to "Advance Wars") that was made during the First Gulf War by Vic Tokai. It says on it- "All the war you could ever want."

The editor's comment- " 'All the war you could ever want'? Which is, what? None?"

If you Google "Super Conflict" in the pictures article, you can get the full analysis, which is quite funny.

Anyway, that's all I got.

PS/OT- Final closer. If you're wondering about the post time (being in America, and it's 4 AM) it's Sunday, and I was watching Formula-One coverage on Speed Channel of the Bahrain GP on TV. The only thing that will keep me up on a Saturday/Sunday night-- F1.

(Yes. F1. The world's best motor sport. Though mid/early 90's with Nigel Mansell, Senna, Berger, Prost, and Jean Alesi- my favorite driver-, etc. F1 was better and much more exciting than the stuff of today. Thank god for the elimination of Traction Control and Driver Aids. You can clearly tell the younger drivers are having a much more difficult time on the tracks from the in-car shots.)

Eryx_UK
06-04-2008, 11:52
Sounds good. Care to post some pictures?

Necron god
06-04-2008, 18:09
......I am too lazy to read it but yer what i read(which was not a lot) sounded good :cheese:

yer i agree with person above me pics would be good

Coragus
07-04-2008, 03:03
Wow, that's a lot of time, money, and effort to devote to an army that isn't even legal. Must look impressive though. I salute the effort, and I'd play it in a friendly game.

Codsticker
07-04-2008, 03:48
A great theme for your army. Telling us about the variety of kits you have used without posting pics is being quite a tease you know.

Adept
07-04-2008, 04:19
That was one hell of a post.

A couple of observations:

1 - The history lessons, while nice, are likely to start up a political debate which will get your thread moved tp PnR. It's usually best to keep the historical references to a minimum; just enough so that people know what you are talking about.

2 - Why spend $175 on archived valhallan infantry, but refuse to buy leman russ kits and an IG codex?

3 - If you are playing 'russians' and your friend is playing 'germans' and you are thinking about recreating stalingrad, perhaps you'd be happier playing an actual historical wargame? You're already halfway there.

Colonel_Kreitz
07-04-2008, 04:27
Paladins. You need Paladins, buddy. I was with a battery of them at Fort Irwin this weekend, and there's a good reason artillery is called the King of the Battlefield. They'd make great Bassies...

ehlijen
07-04-2008, 05:06
Sorry, but I don't think real worl tank models, especially such diverse and non conform collection, fit in with the 40k heroic scale. There's plenty of wargames that use real world tanks, while 40k has it's own visual theme that cannot be found in modern day tanks.
If I saw such an army, I wouldn't think cool, but more cheap and annoying.

TheNZer
07-04-2008, 05:19
I now really want to see some pics!

Captain Jeffrey
07-04-2008, 07:01
Well, I will seriously try my best for pics. The paint jobs are still WIP. None of you mind a few "unpainted" pics, do you?

I also forgot to add in a tank that I forgot-

My "Tank Ace" is a Leopard-II-A5 Main Battle Tank (Germany).

Well, somewhat- actually. The plastic on the T-80s/T-72 are camo green, and the Abrams are in desert beige plastic. By themselves, unpainted, they actually do look good (and looking at *intact* pics of M1A1/M1A2 tanks in the Iraq War, you get that they are almost all one color- minus that you ignore the tons of images now all over Google of many of them on fire/destroyed/in pieces/"looks pretty undrivable".)

If I need to ask questions later of how to, hopefully I don't get "you're stupid!" comments, I hope. (If you wanna see them, give me a hand later.)

I do have a digital camera, but I need a USB cable to transfer them.

Good Q's Adept.

**1- Sorry about the history. I tried to keep it as non-polarized as possible and just an "analysis". As a Slav by heritage (southern Caucus region, probably where I get my white skin,) I have taken an interest to learning native Russian and studying its history.

If you want to see a nice, short 5-minute vid ("watch this with your heart, not your political beliefs") YouTube "Stalingrad" and watch the flick of the movie (a German movie called "Stalingrad".) Some of my color schemes were derived from pictures and some images of that film. I had to turn away when the German soldier was ripped in half by an artillery shot, though. I will warn you that is kind of disturbing.

**2- Well, I'll pay for the soldiers (Kitech makes no 1/48 scale troops, anyway, they make 1/35s, but I think Giant Humans would be kind of crazy, even if used as Ogryns,) and the GW Valhalla models are excellent. I'm green stuffing several of the Lasguns with sickle magazines to make them look like AKs. (I call my Lasguns/Autoguns "AK-274" in my army lists, just as a reference.)

The tanks, however, were a different story. Not only was I "turned off" by the grotesque Leman Russ models (looking far too much like the fictional Nazi tank out of Indiana Jones- Last Crusade), but, by monetary estimates, umm... let me think back.

Around 8 Chimeras, 9 Leman Russes... let's just say 20 tanks-- I think, *roughly*, that's around $900 American. Around $1000 with the taxes.

With the Chinese models, I paid *about* 1/9th 1/10th that cost. Many of the Ebay shipping charges were more than the models themselves, which was hilarious. The cost to get it to me from Toronto was more in fuel burnt by trucks/planes than the model itself was priced and cost to make.

The Hind-D was about $25, but that was from Revell (I think that's either French or American) and I bought it in 2004 and it was sitting in my closet, unassembled for about 3 1/2 years. The Kitech Hinds are, IIRC, 1/72, and that's far, far too tiny for 40K (unless you want me to hysterically count it as an Ork Gyrocopter-- VVVVVRRROOOOMMM 'ERE WE GO.)

I know 40K is in a "dark, dingy" universe, but I like the sleek look of the actual world's arms industry. As crazy as it is, I ripped a page of Starcraft (which was going to be 40K's computer game had GW not been money-grubby and refused to license it to Blizzard- was THAT a mistake or what??) and call my army the U.E.D- Earth's imperial guard force. I figure earth would have some of these tanks still laying around in a warehouse.

I use some of the AC Doctrines in modest amounts, and relatively in-character. To my knowledge the last and only model to use them so far has been the T-72 (a T-72M1 if you want to know the actual Soviet tank version) company commander, who has ERA plates.

IE-

"Chobham Armor Plate" (US/NATO) = Side Skirts (whatever ups your side armor by 1.)

I personally think a Challenger-2 or M1A1 would be 14-14-14 on all sides for armor, and a T-80 would be 14-13-10 (and costing like 50 points less to represent the production ease), I still follow, of course, the basic rules since altering them is grounds for taboo and is not only in bad taste, but is tricky and challenging as many have no idea what they're doing with custom rules (okay- example- one Special Character is perfectly fine. But not an entire army/custom-rules Space Marine Chapter that was hand-written by you.) Those stats are just theoretical speculation.

I did the 14-13-10 as I read from FAS "The Red Thrust Star", which is a US military "Threat Assessment" (you can CTRL+F "THREAT ASSESSMENT- T-80U Main Battle Tank" on the page) on Russian equipment and their analysis of the T-72 was that the Russian Army officially lost an initial 62 of them in the Chechen War, "all of which were not equipped with ERA."

"It has been shown that Russian tanks with ERA have been shown to be completely impervious to AT rounds coming at the front and sides. Only kills have resulted in striking the rear armor, which has no ERA plate." (or something to that ground.) The resultant analysis it seemed was one of "alarm" by the USA and that the T-80U was an "impressive piece of equipment."

"Explosive Reactive Armor Plate" (Russian) = Whatever upgrade (I think "Forge Crafted") allows the one damage chart re-roll once per game. Used to represent the plates exploding outwards and blocking an AT round shot.

All of the models are of Kitech's "The World Famous Tank Series". I think Kitech (or Zhengdefu, whatever it is under nowadays) has a website. But the pics are only of the box covers.

All in all, I think they sell-

Tanks-

**Challenger-1/Challenger-2 Main Battle Tank (UK)
**Merkhava MBT (Israeli)
**M1A1/M1A2 Abrams MBT (American)
**M60A1 Patton (American) - I may try to get ahold of that one. The USMC still uses it and prefers it over the Abrams, to my knowlege, for its better mobility and by far lighter tonnage. That, and it would fit that the T-80s are backed by a T-72 and a T-62. An M1A1 with an M60 near it would fit, too.
**Leopard-II-A5 MBT (German) -blocky looking but nice.
**Type-74 Medium Tank (Japanese) (looks like a knock off of the T-55)
**T-72M1 MBT (Russian)
**T-80 MBT (Russian)
**T-90 MBT (Russian) -after seeing the kit, it looks exactly like the T-80, only with a slightly lower profile and a slightly modded turret.
**AMX-30 Medium Tank (French) -used for my T-62's.
**Type-90 MBT (Japanese) -looks like another US/NATO Abrams/Challenger/knock-off version that the Japanese now make.
**Giat LeClerc MBT (French)
**Leopard MBT (German) -the older T-62/AMX-30 function-alike. Back when West German armor post WW2 was "quantity", along with the French belief, of the futility of thick armor because of the rise in AT round power.

Armored Personnel Transports-

**M3 Bradley (American)
**M2 Bradley (American) -both M3/M2 are the exact same model. Just in different packaging.
**BTR-80 APC w/ SA-7 SAM Battery (Russian)
**BTR-90 APC w/ AT-5 Anti-tank Missile (Russian)
**Marder APC (German)

-I find it very perplexing that this is a Chinese company, yet it makes no Chinese model tanks. Then again, the "Type-99" or whatever they currently use appears to just really be a T-90 or a T-80 under trade with Russia.

They make fighter jets, also, some in 1-48. I may get ahold of an Su-35 Flanker, MiG-29 Fulcrum, or an F-18 Hornet just for a VDR flyer in the future (probably just armor 10 all around, and then armed with one Assault Cannon, two Bombs, and four Rockets.)

Mods (done by me)-

**SA-13 Gopher-

I can turn my Marder into an SA-13 (which will be a VDR designed specifically to fire at flyers for large games/Apocalypse- it will probably be armed with four AA-mounted Missile Launchers and a targeter for BS4 to represent the radar dish) by taking the tracked bottom of the Marder and putting the SA-7 battery from the BTR (all those Russian SAM launchers- as in the rockets themselves- look the same, minus the 'gigantic rocket' high-altitude ones such as the SA-6- aka "The Three Fingers of Death" -nickname given to it by Israeli jet pilots, or the SA-2- which saw extensive action in the Yom Kippur War in 1973.)

If you want to see a "Hollywood" scene of the SA-13, YouTube has a video from the movie "Behind Enemy Lines", where the American fighter jet gets hit by a Serbian SAM battery launch.

Just put in "SA-13 destroys FA-18 Hornett" (yes, Hornett, typo) (something along those grounds) and you can see the vid.

Based off of a real incident, though from after reading Wiki's page on the Serbian/Bosnian War, it was a Yugoslavian SA-6 Gainful destroying an F-16, not an SA-13 destroying an F-18.

I will *TRY* my best to get you all some pictures of my fabulous MBTs. Kitech -Zhengdefu is really a true gem of a model maker. Regardless if you will use them for a wargame or not, they are nice models.

Cute if you motorize them, also.

PS- Final Closer-

The assembly instructions were hysterical. Though the translation from Chinese into English is absolutely excellent for instructions (I have seen FAR worse before, a lot of them from Japan), there is still some funny Engrish in them at times.

"5- Check the fitness of each part before assembly."

Also, unlike GW, the Chinese were really, REALLY nice and gave you in every single kit a tube of model cement (which could be hardened with Zip Kicker, which I used at times) and all the wiring necessary to motorize the kits, as well as a tube of lubricant grease to grease the gears for the motors. How awesome! Rock on to China for that.

Assembling the models literally took several hours with each kit (many small pieces, they are not simple kits like GW), but it was well worth the patience and the wait. I don't mean to deliberately tease you, I really don't have a way to send you pictures. But I will promise if I get them up, I will post replies here or PM you all that want to see them.

Sorry for the length.

Marshal Argos
07-04-2008, 08:54
So I actually read every thing here and in between the history lessons, (which I'm not interested in) It's actually hard to pick out the parts relating to 40k... But I think you have a good idea and wish you luck in building your army. I do though have a few comments. Why, if building a "russian" themed army would you include NATO or US armour? The two just don't mix well in my head.

I know you talked on end about how you have/are going to mod some of the models, but do you plan on making them look 40kish or are you going to use them "as is" and just play using 40k rules?

As for your idea of giving your version of the SA-13 a BS of 4 because of the radar... It just doesn't fly IMHO as the the Radar that is located on the SA-13 is Range only. It is not a Fire Control or Target Acq radar, these are both done by the missile's themselves are IR.

Oh and the reason many of the missile look the same is that they are based off of their MANPADs which low altitude short range. Where as the SA-2,3,4,5,6,10 Etc are true SAM's designed to take out aircraft at range and altitude.

And lastly although FAS is nice, take it all with a pinch of salt. Most of their information is based on "Open source" Intel.

-a fellow cheese head

asmodan
07-04-2008, 16:20
Very cool idea!! I was thinking about it as well, but with WWII tanks. I think the barrels of the russ MBT's are WAAAAAY too big. That's why I am now ordering vanquiser turrets at forgeworld. Tonight I will look those models up on the internet

Asmodan

Captain Jeffrey
08-04-2008, 06:13
Oh, yeah, uh, sorry. I forgot about why the reasons for the NATO equipment. I got two branches in the UEDF, since, well, humanity is "united".

As an added bonus, these models have rubber tracks, and the treads and ballbearings/wheels actually move. They move around slightly up and down as well, just like real tank wheels do. They are very well designed. This also means I don't have to paint and ink treads (as they are jet black rubber), saving me probably about 30 minutes.

The "bottoms" (lower shells that are the wheels, treads, and wiring/battery box set up) of all the tanks are all identical (minus the colors), it's the top shells that distinguish what they look like. It's a very simple concept, but well mastered by that company.

The tops can also be screwed on, but I won't probably do that- as, when destroyed in a game, every single tank's turret comes off, the middle center part comes off, and I can over turn the bottom part and put the tank parts on top of it- making it look haphazardly destroyed without actually having to spend a lot of extra time and money making "casualty" models/wrecks.

Atlas Wing- US/NATO (called "UWC Marine Corps"- (United Western Colonies)
Cronus Wing- Russia/East Asia (called "EEC"- (Eastern Enlisted Conscripts)

They're pretty standardized, I don't want to "40K"ize them too much, they're essentially as is and the T-80s and M1A1s are Leman Russes.

For measurements the heavy bolter checks are made 1 inch out from the sides (the sponsons) and although the coaxial is on the roof of the turret, rules-wise I measure from the front center of the tank (where it is on the actual Leman Russ.)

Game-wise I stick to consistency- every single Leman Russ has a battle cannon and 3 heavy bolters. Challenge wise it's also nice, as it adds variety because my tanks are then relatively bad at destroying armor/monsters (though in reality the 120mm/125mm is what those are for, and tanks as a whole are designed to kill armor, not other people) and I must rely on my infantry squads, if they stand still (they are usually agitated and frequently move, to my opponent's usual surprise, which makes me, maybe, more difficult to out-fox), to fire their Lascannon or, as I just like for the look of the model, the RPG-7 (missile launcher- I use the Valhallan figure with a conical shaped charge green stuffed on the front, and the Steel Legion one.)

For the SA-13 I will just use it in large games/Apocalypse and have it designed as an AA battery, if anyone brings flying aircraft/anything airborne.

The Hind-D is in the same league (large games/Apocalypse.) I'll use VDR, though people moan about them, really, who in anyone's experience has shown up and played someone with a highly abusive model? (The rules deliberately say you must construct the model first and THEN design the rules from what it looks like, not what you want it to do in battle.)

Besides, you "pay" for balanced units in VDR anyway with much higher point costs, and as we know, points are essentially the core determinant to 40K's "power". At times they are inconsistent (Chaos costs less and fights better, for instance), but, to prove that point, play anyone with a 500 point handicap and you should lose.

The only downside to the models is the 120mm and 125mm main guns look ridiculously tiny compared to the Leman Russ's one, which seriously looks like a 300mm cannon.

That, and the 50 caliber on the Bradley looks like a pea shooter. But, no matter! Nobody minds and 9 out of 10 think the models look better than GW's tank models.

The only complaint was the hatches look "small" from one guy (the 10th one). However, I don't think he knows that battle tanks are extremely cramped, hard to get into, and are extremely tiny and uncomfortable. If you stood next to a real main battle tank, you would most likely say, "Hm, they're smaller than I thought." They're deliberately designed to have low profiles (well, the Russian ones are,) to be much more difficult to hit.

Being tall or large in warfare, to what I've heard, is usually not a good thing.

The only downsides to the models, IMO, were that they took a very long time to assemble, and that no two models are alike- I have to mark them so that bottoms to to the right tops and such. There are tiny differences between them (such as 1mm or less in length) between the same models, but if mixed up, they won't fit right when I put them together.

Not that that is a problem if you know what you're doing, though. I treat my models with a lot of respect.

I do have a T-72 model (1/48) from "Academy", a South Korean model company, but 1/48 to that South Korean company has made that tank a little large for my liking for 40K, and so I was essentially out $10. On the upside, I have used it for painting practice.

I finally figured out that camo can easily be made on my tanks with spray (yes, I do have a can of Bleach Bone and Camo Green), and spread out Silly Putty on the areas I don't want covered.

cailus
08-04-2008, 06:39
I actually wish 40K tanks were more realistic. had no qualms with them looking os ridiculous when you had things such as the old Land Raider, Rhino and shoulder mounted heavy bolters but as Games Workshop is trying to make more realistic looking things I think it's time to replace the totally over-the-top Guard tanks with something more realistic.

Either that or revert back to ridiculousness.

Cynoscephalae
08-04-2008, 11:54
I enjoyed the post, as I feal the same way about the out-of-scale , WW1ish GW tanks. I'll probably snatch some of those kits myself and "40K" them by switching out mgs for stubbers, etc. Really wish the politics and History lectures had been left out.

Captain Jeffrey
09-04-2008, 08:17
Good luck, they are hard to find. I got mine on Ebay, though if you find a merchandizer that sells Kitech/Zhengdefu or another clever way to find them (I may want a T-90 kit), would you PM me and tell me if you do?

They are extremely hard to find here in the USA. I have what I essentially need, but one T-90 kit would be fun to have. That, and I could then drop out the Abrams and Leopard tanks and do a pure Eastern theme.

I have to go with the Valhallans as, not only do I love the looks (the metal Cadians are impressive, also), I don't like the Cadian plastics. Though clearly "NATO"/"US", they look "plump", and their faces are blocky (why I also won't buy Space Marine Scouts in plastic), and that has turned me off from them.

They all look like they have spent more time drinking or going to McDonald's (or taking too many desserts from the dessert counter in the mess hall) than time spent at the firing range or in the gym doing cardio.

You give their faces a slight red/rose wash to them and they get that "I enjoy drinking heavily" look to them.

Müller
09-04-2008, 08:46
This thread is USLESS without PICS!

Captain Jeffrey
16-04-2008, 10:55
Company Website (with pics)-

http://www.kitech.com/kiuhung_eng/P_model_kits.php

Sorry for being gone for awhile.

That is the company's website and it has many color pic example models- I seriously think they all beat the pants off of GW's stuff. Old (AMX-30) or new (T-90), all of the models are amazing.

Click on "The World Famous Tank Series" and you can see what models I have. I'm still WIP 'ing most of them, but I think the paintjobs are going to come out very well.

If you'd like a book on the subject, I have run across a good one from the "Jane's" book series called "Tank Recognition Guide" (opening pages are Light Support/Main Battle Tanks- it then goes into Armored Personnel Carriers- then Wheeled Personnel Vehicles- such as the ubiquitous BRDM-2 with AT-launcher-rounds or the Humvee- and then finally Self-Propelled/Recoilless Anti-Tank/Artillery Vehicles)-- though FAS.org gets you pretty much the exact same data (really, the site is excellent- I truly believe that the best form of unbiased military analysis comes from civilian contractors and scientific experts) for free.

Lots of WMD info if it piques your interest (though that's some pretty scary stuff.)

Site's even got a load of technical readouts, a lot of which are taken directly from the US military. If you even look hard enough, you can find de-classified DIA Intelligence Estimates for the USSR from 1981-1989 (that is a LOT of "red" equipment/graph bars in comparison to "blue" bars/graphs- US/NATO, especially the analysis on the Space Program ("Weight to Orbit"/"Satellites In Orbit", etc.) and the site's even got a field user's manual for the RPG-7 in PDF.

As a closer, some of the models on the site are slightly altered. If you want a great representation as to what the kits really usually are composed of, take a close look at the M60A3 Patton tank model.

Lord Cook
16-04-2008, 11:42
"Chobham Armor Plate" (US/NATO)

Chobham is very much British iirc. NATO uses it as well of course. The new Challenger II is using the upgraded version, which hasn't found its way across the Atlantic yet.

I don't mind the history lessons at all, although you're preaching to the converted a little here, given that I study History at degree level anyway. But I think using other (non-GW) tank models is fine, but maybe you should consider some extensive conversion work to bring them into the 40k universe a little. Things like weapons, crew, stowage, etc. Try to make them look as if they belong in the Imperial Guard, without compromising the overall 'look'.

Bunnahabhain
16-04-2008, 16:43
There is no shortage of people who use real world forces as the basis for their guard armies.

Quite a large proportion of them use real world armour, 1:48 for most things, as it is cheaper than GW, and often better. However, they also take some time to 40k-ify them. 40k gear in the stowage, swapping secondary weapons over to something recognisable, adding imperial tank markings, etc, etc. It just makes them fit better.

I myself have a bren carrier as a centaur, and 1:35 Tigers as super heavies. Both are heavily converted, not to make them look less like real tanks, but to make them more like fitting in a 40k Universe

Also, the mixing of Nato and Russian armour just sounds like a bad idea. Mixed model series can work, but you need a unifying theme, ie Imperialising them, and a unified paint scheme, and as far as I can tell, you have neither.

Necron god
16-04-2008, 17:04
We want pics instead of history leason..I do that at school ;)

Captain Jeffrey
21-04-2008, 07:38
I'll be looking into "Foundry Miniatures". Two buddies of mine at the club recently (today) have expressed watching interest in my Imperial Guard army and basically told me that those such minis are 1/48, are exact copies of Russian troops, and cost, yeah, pretty much, guess what, like 1/4 GW's and a lot of other extremely high-priced UK stuff.

I got the skills to convert, there's no doubts there. I'm currently working on sickle magazines on all my Lasguns my Valhallans are carrying.

Oh, by no means, I do have some quite Imperial marks on them. There are Imperial Eagle tool kits on the back (can't also go wrong with those fuel drums- the AMX-30s will have them on the back eventually to make them totally unidentifable as my AMX-30s, and rather as T-62s, which I want.)

I have no NATO troops (as in Cadians), I might drop the Atlas Wing theme entirely but keep the US/NATO models in the list, but with Russian and Chinese markings, as remnants of a "Twilight Zone" World War III scenario aeons before The Emperor united mankind- where the West took on the East- (all over a dispute over clean water,) and in the end- lost.

I never saw that Family Guy episode on that (in a much more comical tone), where Reagan's presidential opponent becomes president instead, the USSR then shortly after invades through Alaska and the Bering Strait, and after smashing its way past Canada, the USA unconditionally surrenders like 4 weeks into the war.

However, the color waterslides I'm getting of "BEI FASCHISTU" (along the grounds of "Destroy Fascism") and "ZA STALINGRADU" ("For Stalingrad") are going on my tanks. :) They just look better than anything GW makes- also, that Red Star *HAS* to go on every single tank, as well as my 1/48 Mi-24 Hind-D for large games.

Anyway, it's still WIP, but it's been a fun job so far. Almost, maybe more, enjoyable than my Tyranids.

Gwedd
21-04-2008, 14:03
Captain Jeffrey


(Short, editorial/brief history note- is Iraq doing the same to the US? -probably not as bad, but it's going to make the quality of life for American John Q. Taxpayer a lot worse- Billions of dollars in equipment loss (main battle tanks destroyed/disabled, Humvees destroyed, APCs destroyed/disabled, some extremely expensive aircraft lost through pilot error or rocket fire, etc.) (and you also can't put a dollar value on limbs blown off), and extremely high wartime costs, coupled with, for some reason, low taxes, causing us to borrow heavily from PR China, which is now eating up our Treasury Bonds by the hundreds of billions? "Recession" is all over the news here. Maybe. And no end in sight.) Anyway-

The short answer is a definite no. The cost to the taxpayer is incredibly small. To date, according to the OMB figures, the actions in Iaq and Afghanistan combined since 2001 have amounted to just under 1/2 of 1% of the United States' GDP. In point of fact, the US' military budgets since the year 2000 are smaller, as a percentage of GDP, than at any time in the nation's history.

It's an election year. The airwaves will be full of finger-pointing and exaggerations until after November... sigh.....

Respects,

Gwedd
21-04-2008, 14:08
Captain,

You can get some pretty modern looking beficles from the 40K line with a little work :)

Here is the Chimera upgrade I use. Works as either a BMP-type, or a light tank..

Respects,

Varath- Lord Impaler
21-04-2008, 14:57
I don't mind the history lessons at all, although you're preaching to the converted a little here, given that I study History at degree level anyway.

Same here, of the Ancient kind, but im not picky.

Perhaps thats why my Death Korps Line up and charge forward rather than doing anything alittle more...tactical

Felwether
21-04-2008, 15:11
Your list isn't exactly eh... Fluffy...

Are you using this list to play 40K including the fluff or are you just using the 40K rules to play a wargame?

AngryAngel
21-04-2008, 19:37
Good work man, don't listen to the haters. Keep staying the course. I love the red army concept. I actually was going to use a Hind model and convert it some to use a thunderhawk in some apoc games. The russians had some sweet vehicles, definatly very commanding.

As said I'd stick with one concept and follow it. All russian for the win!!

Felwether
21-04-2008, 20:46
I'm not saying it's not a good idea, far from it in fact.
There's one thing that bugs me, ie. where the army's from.