PDA

View Full Version : Old vehicles



shooty06
26-12-2014, 13:12
I have 6 old Rhinos. These are a bit smaller than teh new ones. Would it be considered "Modeling for advantage" if i used these? I know it is my choice but before i do this i just want to get a general feel of what teh player base thinks.

Thanks

Dominoris
26-12-2014, 13:35
I have some of the smaller ones I use with my Sisters of Battle. It is almost always better to use the newer, bigger rhinos but I like how the old SoB rhinos fit the army.

These are the original models. You did nothing to try for an advantage; in my experience, they are actually a disadvantage but that may be an effect of the army I am using them with. If they are still exactly like they were when GW sold them, they are legal models.

Besides, there is no rule against "modeling for advantage" any more :)

Ragnar69
26-12-2014, 14:59
When I have used vehicles with the old rhino chasis the only reactions have been "cool, old stuff ". Nobody ever complained about them.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9300 mit Tapatalk

Angelwing
26-12-2014, 15:36
There is no problem at all with any old vehicles. The old ork battlewagon is a bit small to be honest, but I still use it as is.

Lord Damocles
26-12-2014, 15:46
Isn't the original Battlewagon model smaller than a current Trukk? That's just about then only old vehicle which really gives any meaningful advantage.

Beppo1234
26-12-2014, 16:33
IMO, the old models have far more officiality to them than new ones

Clang
26-12-2014, 19:19
You can 'bulk up' old Rhinos by adding stowage crates and/or extra armour to bring them closer to the current Rhino's dimensions - then just let opponents know before games that the bulked up dimensions count for LoS purposes (and why).

But to be honest, the dimensions aren't that bad a match, for anything outside a serious tournament.

Harwammer
26-12-2014, 19:27
File down the rings on the hull that helps you stick the tracks on in place and instead glue the hulls to be a centimetre higher up than standard.

Also, you could base your tanks to give them extra height.

Okuto
26-12-2014, 21:56
Doesn't matter really.....all my whirlwinds are the older ones.....while their size is helpful, I'm just cheap and don't want to buy new ones....

Although I cannibalized all my old rhinos into various ork trukks/tanks. Kept one for my chaos marines as a memento

Which I kinda regret cause I could have used them with the 30k fetish going on nowadays

Hrw-Amen
26-12-2014, 22:15
Should be no problems at all, they are genuine GW models, that is what counts, not how old or big they are. If they were sold as Rhinos by GW then they are Rhinos and that is it.

T10
26-12-2014, 22:51
I have 6 old Rhinos. These are a bit smaller than teh new ones. Would it be considered "Modeling for advantage" if i used these? I know it is my choice but before i do this i just want to get a general feel of what teh player base thinks.

Thanks

I am sure teh player base will respect your Rhinos.

T10
26-12-2014, 22:56
Besides, there is no rule against "modeling for advantage" any more :)

When was there ever? I recall some rules disallowing the use of smaller bases, was that 4th ed?

-T10

insectum7
27-12-2014, 01:51
When was there ever? I recall some rules disallowing the use of smaller bases, was that 4th ed?

-T10

I've been called on it once for having Land Raider with the Heavy Bolters in a turret mount on top, and the Multimelta installed in the front mount where the Heavy Bolters go. I like it because it looks better, and makes more sense to me that the anti-infantry "defensive" weapons would have a 360 arc. But I've only been called out for it once.

The old rhinos being shorter means that a Land Raider can shoot clear over it pretty easily, while the Rhino can give cover to the Land Raider behind it. I think the clearance for the current Rhino is considerably less, but I can't pull out my models at the moment to check. I've got an original Land Raider modela nd it's gonna get used, but it's field-able as the Proteus, which has it's own rules, there's no real advantage other than it looking cooler :)

Commissar von Toussaint
27-12-2014, 02:57
Always, always, always, always go with the older models. If they give you advantage, you earned it. :)

Eldartank
27-12-2014, 05:39
I see nothing wrong with using any older models, especially if you are using them as they were originally designed. I personally prefer the newer Rhinos, as I never really like the old style Rhinos - they had an unrealistic look to me. I eventually replaced all my old Rhinos with the newer ones. But I would never object to an opponent using old Rhinos, as I think that would just be petty. However, I would love to get one of those old plastic Land Raiders from 2nd Edition, because it would be cool to have such an old style model.

Eldartank
27-12-2014, 05:42
I have a question that I hope someone can answer: I heard that GW (or some stores) banned the use of old style Rhinos in tournaments for a short time, until enough people complained about it and they clarified that all models produced by GW are tournament legal. Is any of this true?

totgeboren
27-12-2014, 13:10
I took the middle ground and added some extension bits between the tracks and the main hull on my old Rhinos and Predator.
Rhinos
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?191618-My-Traitor-Guards&p=4261551&viewfull=1#post4261551
Predator
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?191618-My-Traitor-Guards&p=6757311&viewfull=1#post6757311

Just to get them to the same height and width. But I guess it's easier with Chaos models, since they should look a bit archaic. It's a bit harder to convert loyalist vehicles, but it can definitely be done.

Angelwing
27-12-2014, 13:23
Isn't the original Battlewagon model smaller than a current Trukk? That's just about then only old vehicle which really gives any meaningful advantage.

Thinking about it, the old metal ork scorchas, trakks and buggies are tiny compared to their current plastics. Not sure what advantage there is. being smaller its easier to get a cover save perhaps, but it would be harder to draw a line of sight shooting back.
The old battlewagon is wider than the current trukk, but lower. I've had no complaints about it. However, I do run it as is - ie no upgrades as they are not on the model, so no deff rollers, kannons, ard tops or whatever.

Commissar von Toussaint
27-12-2014, 15:34
I see nothing wrong with using any older models, especially if you are using them as they were originally designed. I personally prefer the newer Rhinos, as I never really like the old style Rhinos - they had an unrealistic look to me. I eventually replaced all my old Rhinos with the newer ones. But I would never object to an opponent using old Rhinos, as I think that would just be petty. However, I would love to get one of those old plastic Land Raiders from 2nd Edition, because it would be cool to have such an old style model.

I must beg to differ with you on this. The old rhinos look far better. Yes, they are smaller but that was because the models themselves were smaller - closer to true 25mm than the current iteration. As a vehicle design, they looked fairly clean, with decent sloping armor. The variants also used a similar aesthetic, with domed turrets and understated weapon sponsons.

The current version is blocky and is clearly meant to recall the depths of 1930s tank design - complete with flat surfaces and shot traps under the turrets. As for unrealistic, none of GW's tanks have anything approaching a decent suspension system. The ride in those vehicles is probably as deadly as incoming enemy fire.

One can make allowances for early sculpts and improvisation at the beginning of an enterprise. Even the chunky two-piece models of that era have a certain amount of charm as they were designed to be affordable and easy to assemble and paint. The current look (such as it is) is both overly complicated and ugly.

Back to the subject of the thread, I find it likely GW tried to ban older models because they long ago abandoned the idea of creating a stable, durable product that would grow and sustain itself based on its quality and reputation. This was their initial stance and for all the flaws, both Fantasy and 40k flourished because they were the best thing out there (I retain a copy of TSR's old Battlesystem to remind me of this).

Every few years I surface to see the state of the "GW Hobby" in the forlorn hope that I might be inspired to return. Each time I come back I find a little more of the creativity and innovation has been drained away and replaced with homogenous, overpriced skull-laden crap. Far more interesting to me as a modeler is the notion of scratch-building and kit-bashing unique variants of these vehicles, filling the old gaps in the company range or improving on their design.

I think it says something about the tournament mentality that people worry about the exact dimensions of models on a tabletop. If that's an issue, go to using a hex grid and be done with it. Board gaming is a lot easier for doing LOS and terrain restrictions, plus there's no bother about paint and glue. On the other hand, if you like those things, you put up with it. Miniatures gaming is supposed to be something done at leisure, without having to measure models to the millimeter to find out if they are "tournament legal."

I do go on, but having said my bit I will shortly disappear for another year - no doubt to universal relief. :)

Beppo1234
27-12-2014, 17:18
Every few years I surface to see the state of the "GW Hobby" in the forlorn hope that I might be inspired to return. Each time I come back I find a little more of the creativity and innovation has been drained away and replaced with homogenous, overpriced skull-laden crap. Far more interesting to me as a modeler is the notion of scratch-building and kit-bashing unique variants of these vehicles, filling the old gaps in the company range or improving on their design.

I think it says something about the tournament mentality that people worry about the exact dimensions of models on a tabletop. If that's an issue, go to using a hex grid and be done with it. Board gaming is a lot easier for doing LOS and terrain restrictions, plus there's no bother about paint and glue. On the other hand, if you like those things, you put up with it. Miniatures gaming is supposed to be something done at leisure, without having to measure models to the millimeter to find out if they are "tournament legal."

I do go on, but having said my bit I will shortly disappear for another year - no doubt to universal relief. :)

I agree with you about measurement, if one is doing this hobby, and worrying about millimeters, one is doing something wrong

I do however disagree about the state of the hobby. Yes, GW has replaced many things with product, that in the past would have taken acquired hobby skills to do. But that doesn't lessen the hobby, it just improves one's starting handicap.

Vaktathi
27-12-2014, 20:37
On a slight tangent to the original topic, I started looking through older SM vehicles, and we've had what, three different GW plastic kits for the Predator thus far right?

the very old "T-55" style single-barrel turret with the side sponson guns just sticking out from the side hatches, the later version with differentiated autocannon and lascannon turrets with Leman Russ style sponsons, and then the current kit?

Ol'timer
27-12-2014, 21:29
Doesn't matter really.....all my whirlwinds are the older ones.....while their size is helpful, I'm just cheap and don't want to buy new ones....

Although I cannibalized all my old rhinos into various ork trukks/tanks. Kept one for my chaos marines as a memento

Which I kinda regret cause I could have used them with the 30k fetish going on nowadays
I do the same. Building a predator using the orig. turret with a add on just to make it scale bigger for the hull. Also my old landraider got a 1" add on in length for the same reason, but yeah, thanks for the proteus rules. The new rhino works pretty good for a orig. design rhino without major changes

aa.logan
27-12-2014, 21:32
On a slight tangent to the original topic, I started looking through older SM vehicles, and we've had what, three different GW plastic kits for the Predator thus far right?

the very old "T-55" style single-barrel turret with the side sponson guns just sticking out from the side hatches, the later version with differentiated autocannon and lascannon turrets with Leman Russ style sponsons, and then the current kit?

The second one was a plastic/metal hybrid

Senbei
27-12-2014, 22:17
On a slight tangent to the original topic, I started looking through older SM vehicles, and we've had what, three different GW plastic kits for the Predator thus far right?

the very old "T-55" style single-barrel turret with the side sponson guns just sticking out from the side hatches, the later version with differentiated autocannon and lascannon turrets with Leman Russ style sponsons, and then the current kit?

The first version had a Ball-Turret with an Autocannon (AC being closer to Battlecannon at first) and 'cup' sponsons with Las-Cannon. It was an all-plastic kit that was based on the MK 1 rhino. This was sold for a good while during RT and even after 2nd ed 40k was released.

During 2nd Ed this was replaced with a couple of hybrid variations, both based on that same Mk 1 Rhino. There was a twin las-cannon ball-turret and a much squarer auto-cannon version. There may also have been a Hybrid Baal kit, but I'm not 100% on that.

I assume that the current version arrived at some point after 3rd ed and the MK2 Rhino hit the scene.

Commissar von Toussaint
28-12-2014, 00:45
The thing I never understood is why they would redesign the rhino and yet keep using that awful Leman Russ model, complete with cartoon gun barrel. Based on those proportions the main gun would, if actually fired, crush the gunner and loader and punch a hole in the rear wall of the turret.

For the record, my Imperial Guard uses converted 1:35 scale Stuarts. The footprint is virtually identical but they have working running gear.

And yes, footprint does matter, which is why I make sure my non-GW kits match up well with what they are replacing. However, I would be outraged of my Mark I rhinos were banned from game play in favor of the slab-sided all-riveted atrocities they are now peddling. (In the grim darkness of the far future we have mastered space travel but welded tank hulls are a lost art. :rolleyes: )

Eldartank
28-12-2014, 04:23
I must beg to differ with you on this. The old rhinos look far better. Yes, they are smaller but that was because the models themselves were smaller - closer to true 25mm than the current iteration. As a vehicle design, they looked fairly clean, with decent sloping armor. The variants also used a similar aesthetic, with domed turrets and understated weapon sponsons.

The current version is blocky and is clearly meant to recall the depths of 1930s tank design - complete with flat surfaces and shot traps under the turrets. As for unrealistic, none of GW's tanks have anything approaching a decent suspension system. The ride in those vehicles is probably as deadly as incoming enemy fire.

One can make allowances for early sculpts and improvisation at the beginning of an enterprise. Even the chunky two-piece models of that era have a certain amount of charm as they were designed to be affordable and easy to assemble and paint. The current look (such as it is) is both overly complicated and ugly.

No!!! You're WRONG!!!! (Just kidding) This is all clearly a matter of individual perspective and personal preference. I really like the Leman Russ tanks, and another poster just made a detailed explanation as to why he doesn't like that particular tank. I could go on as to why I think the newer Rhino is better looking, but the whole perspective and preference thing ultimately means that neither of us is wrong. ;)

totgeboren
28-12-2014, 09:58
The thing I never understood is why they would redesign the rhino and yet keep using that awful Leman Russ model, complete with cartoon gun barrel. Based on those proportions the main gun would, if actually fired, crush the gunner and loader and punch a hole in the rear wall of the turret.

For the record, my Imperial Guard uses converted 1:35 scale Stuarts. The footprint is virtually identical but they have working running gear.

And yes, footprint does matter, which is why I make sure my non-GW kits match up well with what they are replacing. However, I would be outraged of my Mark I rhinos were banned from game play in favor of the slab-sided all-riveted atrocities they are now peddling. (In the grim darkness of the far future we have mastered space travel but welded tank hulls are a lost art. :rolleyes: )

Have to agree with all of this, though they did redesign the Leman Russ a bunch of years ago. It looks about the same, but they redid the tracks so you cant easily convert it to have working running gear anymore (like this, also, note the smaller barrel bore in the first post (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?189881-My-take-on-the-Leman-Russ&p=3417098&viewfull=1#post3417098)).

This 'no-suspension' look GW uses is just horrible to my eyes. It's like designing a really cool sports car, and then giving it square wheels. A detail like that ruins everything, because it doesn't look like it can do the very thing that its coolness depends upon.

But when it comes to size, stuff like that matter. I would object a bit to Angelwings use of an old-school Battlewagon as a current-day Battlewagon. The size is just not incredibly off, there is a perfect count-as candidate in the current-day Trukk, since they are the same size and the models also represent the same thing, though the names differ (the current trukk and the old Battlewagon were/are both fairly light transports). Moving back in time, the current Battlewagon would be like the old Epic Battlefortress but with a w40k model or something similar.

I use my old metal RT Chaos Dreadnought as an Obilterator sometimes, because they are the same size. When it comes to vehicles, size is incredibly important in game-play, simply because they have no armour save so cover is all they got to reduce incoming fire. Being smaller is a huge benefit.

Commissar von Toussaint
28-12-2014, 15:27
Nice tanks! I must admit I never thought of making a smaller bore so that the proportions work. My solution (back when I still used GW kits) was to replace the barrel entirely with something more proportional. I even added a t-shaped muzzle break just for fun.

When the footprint is very different, that is an issue, no question. I used to use a modified Kangaroo as a Hellhound (thus making it a variant of a variant of a variant :D ) but because it was 1:35 scale, the thing was huge compared to my other vehicles. Hellhounds don't have much longevity as it is, but this thing was a bullet magnet in every sense - templates couldn't miss and cover was impossible to find. I therefore converted it into a Griffon, since those tend to stay out of the way. It is still vulnerable to counterbattery, but I can live with that (as can the crew ;) ).

Grand Master Raziel
28-12-2014, 15:36
I've been called on it once for having Land Raider with the Heavy Bolters in a turret mount on top, and the Multimelta installed in the front mount where the Heavy Bolters go. I like it because it looks better, and makes more sense to me that the anti-infantry "defensive" weapons would have a 360 arc. But I've only been called out for it once.

I've thought about remodeling a Land Raider so the TLLCs would be in top-mounted turrets, with the rear one higher battleship-style so both TLLCs could bear on targets in all arcs except directly to the rear. But, that'd definitely be modeling for advantage, and a real pain in the neck to do besides.

Another thought I've had - the basic Godhammer Land Raider might be a more popular vehicle if you could swap the TLHB with a TL-multimelta. The Storm Raven provides a precedent for such a swap - no points cost either.

AndrewGPaul
29-12-2014, 11:00
I've thought about remodeling a Land Raider so the TLLCs would be in top-mounted turrets, with the rear one higher battleship-style so both TLLCs could bear on targets in all arcs except directly to the rear. But, that'd definitely be modeling for advantage, and a real pain in the neck to do besides.

I don't see a problem. It is an official design, after all.

http://www.solegends.com/citcat1999/c1999p0233-00.jpg

(look in the bottom right corner)

tneva82
29-12-2014, 11:24
I do however disagree about the state of the hobby. Yes, GW has replaced many things with product, that in the past would have taken acquired hobby skills to do. But that doesn't lessen the hobby, it just improves one's starting handicap.

Yeah I find it ridiculous that it would be BAD thing that standard model now looks like awesome conversion of '90's. That's GOOD thing and doesn't mean converting skills etc are any less good. It simply means you can do even more awesome conversions if basic pieces are better.

Beppo1234
29-12-2014, 13:45
I've thought about remodeling a Land Raider so the TLLCs would be in top-mounted turrets, with the rear one higher battleship-style so both TLLCs could bear on targets in all arcs except directly to the rear. But, that'd definitely be modeling for advantage, and a real pain in the neck to do besides.

Another thought I've had - the basic Godhammer Land Raider might be a more popular vehicle if you could swap the TLHB with a TL-multimelta. The Storm Raven provides a precedent for such a swap - no points cost either.

I did this:

204907

most people don't bother much about the conversion

T10
29-12-2014, 13:52
The thing I never understood is why they would redesign the rhino and yet keep using that awful Leman Russ model, complete with cartoon gun barrel. Based on those proportions the main gun would, if actually fired, crush the gunner and loader and punch a hole in the rear wall of the turret.


What I don't get is why they insist on making those incredibly unrealistic lascannons when they look nothing like the real thing:

204908

It's as if the've just decided on a clunky, hyperbolic aesthetic and stuck with it.

-T10

duffybear1988
29-12-2014, 15:44
IMO, the old models have far more officiality to them than new ones

What Beppo said.

Eldartank
30-12-2014, 02:30
Totgeboren, that is an awesome looking tank! You've somehow managed to keep the original aesthetic look of the Leman Russ while making it more realistic.

totgeboren
30-12-2014, 10:08
Nice tanks! I must admit I never thought of making a smaller bore so that the proportions work. My solution (back when I still used GW kits) was to replace the barrel entirely with something more proportional. I even added a t-shaped muzzle break just for fun.



Totgeboren, that is an awesome looking tank! You've somehow managed to keep the original aesthetic look of the Leman Russ while making it more realistic.

Even though this is hardly the thread for it, I must say Thank you very much! :)
The intent with my conversions was to turn the Leman Russ into something that was a little more believable (suspension, room in the turret for the gun, smaller bore on the barrel), so your comments were pretty spot on. :)

Bookwrak
02-01-2015, 02:56
I've been called on it once for having Land Raider with the Heavy Bolters in a turret mount on top, and the Multimelta installed in the front mount where the Heavy Bolters go. I like it because it looks better, and makes more sense to me that the anti-infantry "defensive" weapons would have a 360 arc. But I've only been called out for it once.

The old rhinos being shorter means that a Land Raider can shoot clear over it pretty easily, while the Rhino can give cover to the Land Raider behind it. I think the clearance for the current Rhino is considerably less, but I can't pull out my models at the moment to check. I've got an original Land Raider modela nd it's gonna get used, but it's field-able as the Proteus, which has it's own rules, there's no real advantage other than it looking cooler :)
The only time I've ever had an issue with it was a Sisters of Battle player I faced back in 5th edition, who sought out old style whirlwinds to use for his exorcists, and would park them on a Realm of Battle hill in the corner, then park a modern rhino crossways in front of them. This meant the hull was completely obscured so it couldn't be targeted, but the missile launchers had a clear field of fire.

Grand Master Raziel
02-01-2015, 05:12
Even though this is hardly the thread for it, I must say Thank you very much! :)
The intent with my conversions was to turn the Leman Russ into something that was a little more believable (suspension, room in the turret for the gun, smaller bore on the barrel), so your comments were pretty spot on. :)

I agree with Eldartank, your Leman Russes with the bulked up turrets look really good!

Legiocustodes
04-01-2015, 01:08
Well as you can see from the attached links to my blog I have been working on a project over the last year to make an army of Legion-era Salamanders entirely from old school 1980s models. I currently have 8 Rhinos; 3 Predators; a Land Raider; a Whirlwind and a Land Speeder, all of which are vintage models that I have painstakingly sourced, constructed and painted!

Therefore if I turned up for a game with my opponent and they whinged about my models I would calmly pack up my stuff before pulling out a hammer and smashing everyone of their models to pieces... Let's see if they have anything to say about that.

To be fair I was up at Warhammer World last week and the only thing staff and gamers alike had to say was how cool it was to see such lovely old models on the table! So I say go for it! Retro is the future!

http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/rogue-trader-whirlwind-salamanders.html (http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/rogue-trader-whirlwind-salamanders.html)
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/rogue-trader-salamanders-tanks-update.html
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/tank-update.html
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/imperial-armour1987.html
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/fast-time-predator.html
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/big-green-land-raider-rolls-off-1989.html
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/rogue-trader-predatorcomplete.html
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/rogue-trader-land-speeder-and-other.html

MasterDecoy
04-01-2015, 05:05
I personally wouldnt have a problem with playing against older models, BUT.....

I cant honestly see why anyone would prefer the look of those older models, the sculpts are terrible. Sure some of the new ones have far too many skulls ect, but the general aesthetics are just so much better.

Dominoris
04-01-2015, 06:56
http://u18chan.com/uploads/data/13325/Yeah-well-you-know-thats-just-like-your-opinion-man_u18chan.jpg

MasterDecoy
04-01-2015, 08:11
http://u18chan.com/uploads/data/13325/Yeah-well-you-know-thats-just-like-your-opinion-man_u18chan.jpg
And i don't disagree with that statement