Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Just realized the champion helmet is based off the WB Diabolist from one of the FW books

Not a fan of the new WB helms. Has that sort of derpy flanderisque feel that belongs more in tacky 40K CSM sculpts than with HH. HH traitors usually have a bit more class than that IMO

Not Online!!! wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/12/22/heresy-thursday-sacrifice-your-mkvi-space-marines-on-the-altar-of-style-with-word-bearers-upgrades/

Word bearers upgrades.

i don't know, the beakies just don't fit to me for WB. That said, sergant daemon helmet is a good one.

This is the issue with making everything for one armour mark. For me certain legion's only fit specific armour marks. My EC only have MK4 and later. I think WE look best in MK3. Other legions fit a wider variety of MKS but Mk6 has a specific look that only suits certain legion's.

 tauist wrote:
Not a fan of the new WB helms. Has that sort of derpy flanderisque feel that belongs more in tacky 40K CSM sculpts than with HH. HH traitors usually have a bit more class than that IMO

Yeah, to me it feels like they tried to do inscribed symbols like you'd expect on WB, but they used the wrong sized tool and pushed it in to hard to create giant ravines in the armour.

The exact same idea with faint inscriptions I think would have looked good, especially since I assume these are resin so they should be able to do that sort of fine detail.

Sorry but the WB Decal Sheet has better stuff to represent such markings on the Helmets...

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 tauist wrote:
Not a fan of the new WB helms. Has that sort of derpy flanderisque feel that belongs more in tacky 40K CSM sculpts than with HH. HH traitors usually have a bit more class than that IMO

Yeah, to me it feels like they tried to do inscribed symbols like you'd expect on WB, but they used the wrong sized tool and pushed it in to hard to create giant ravines in the armour.

The exact same idea with faint inscriptions I think would have looked good, especially since I assume these are resin so they should be able to do that sort of fine detail.

I think the intent is readability from a distance and making it easier for people to overpaint the deeper grooves.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/12/22/heresy-thursday-sacrifice-your-mkvi-space-marines-on-the-altar-of-style-with-word-bearers-upgrades/

Word bearers upgrades.

i don't know, the beakies just don't fit to me for WB. That said, sergant daemon helmet is a good one.

This is the issue with making everything for one armour mark. For me certain legion's only fit specific armour marks. My EC only have MK4 and later. I think WE look best in MK3. Other legions fit a wider variety of MKS but Mk6 has a specific look that only suits certain legion's.

But most of the legions have had helms, shoulder pads and sometimes even torso's from previous marks for a long time. Hell some have even had shoulders for terminator marks.

It makes sense that they're making new stuff for the new mark of armour. Though, i kinda wish they had made a plastic sprue like with 40K chapters, add in some legion specific odds and ends.

Like the Sargeant's helmet. The rest are kinda "meh", IMO. But then, I'm not the target audience. Hopefully WB players like them.

I must admit, while I can see the value in these Legion upgrade sets, I feel that they are a bit of a cheap way of filling out the HH range. They are kind of hit-and-miss too. Having seen some up close, the quality seems to be good, but I doubt I'll be getting any.

The contrast between the mkii-v upgrade kits(pauldron & helm) and the mkvi is stark. I'm generally a fan of them across the legions, but all of the new ones are very hit/miss and I'm tepid on my 18th but do like the 3rd's(for when I add Istvaan children to my current Siege force).

The bulk of my 18th(60ish mkiii) which was jacked all had pauldrons & helmet upgrades but I don't see me doing that to my "replacement" mkvi.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/12/22/heresy-thursday-sacrifice-your-mkvi-space-marines-on-the-altar-of-style-with-word-bearers-upgrades/

Word bearers upgrades.

i don't know, the beakies just don't fit to me for WB. That said, sergant daemon helmet is a good one.

This is the issue with making everything for one armour mark. For me certain legion's only fit specific armour marks. My EC only have MK4 and later. I think WE look best in MK3. Other legions fit a wider variety of MKS but Mk6 has a specific look that only suits certain legion's.

Well that's your choice. Fluff all used all especially on game's scale.

I'd rather GW would finally release :
Jetbikers, bikers, Jumppack infantry, melee infantry, recoon infantry, combiweapon kit, Terminator weapon kit and power weapon kit,
Before we get more legion specific things.

Specifying legions is easier, than kitbsahing the core of the legiones astartes. IoW misplaced priorities.

Funnily enuff my entire RT Salamanders were mkiii & vi I'm lore accurate in my modern force.

Who knew my 1990 40k list was actually a 30k list all this time.

Not Online!!! wrote:
I'd rather GW would finally release :
Jetbikers, bikers, Jumppack infantry, melee infantry, recoon infantry, combiweapon kit, Terminator weapon kit and power weapon kit,
Before we get more legion specific things.

Specifying legions is easier, than kitbsahing the core of the legiones astartes. IoW misplaced priorities.

The resin upgrade kits are a separate production and distribution chain from the plastic generic units. Agreed that it would be great to have plastic bikes, assault/despoilers, and some more consul options next, but I expect next week to be another upgrade preview then the week after to be the deimos vindicator

I'd say the new heads are honestly a step above what we got for Mark 4.



The shoulder pads I like more as well. here's the Mark 4 for comparison.



Only thing they haven't given us are new torsos. Those would make for a great final touch to a word bearers force...



Overall, though, if you like the beaky helmet, I think they really hit the nail on the head for these upgrades, and I'm very tempted to change my plans to go Word Bearers instead.

tneva82 wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/12/22/heresy-thursday-sacrifice-your-mkvi-space-marines-on-the-altar-of-style-with-word-bearers-upgrades/

Word bearers upgrades.

i don't know, the beakies just don't fit to me for WB. That said, sergant daemon helmet is a good one.

This is the issue with making everything for one armour mark. For me certain legion's only fit specific armour marks. My EC only have MK4 and later. I think WE look best in MK3. Other legions fit a wider variety of MKS but Mk6 has a specific look that only suits certain legion's.

Well that's your choice. Fluff all used all especially on game's scale.

Imagine I'd used something like 'for me' as a prefix to me expressing my opinion...

Not Online!!! wrote:
I'd rather GW would finally release :
Jetbikers, bikers, Jumppack infantry, melee infantry, recoon infantry, combiweapon kit, Terminator weapon kit and power weapon kit,
Before we get more legion specific things.

Specifying legions is easier, than kitbsahing the core of the legiones astartes. IoW misplaced priorities.

It's not misplaced when there needs to be stuff released later on.
The quintessential Space Marine units have almost all been released so far with only Assault Marines missing from the "traditional" lineup. GW can't release the entire generic Heresy range in 6 months because that's not a feasible business strategy. When HH first came out the variant armour patterns and vehicles already existed on FW alongside the normal 40k options, meaning it was largely just rules and unique Legion units. The Mechanicum got most of the attention in the first round of HH books because there was literally nothing for the army.
GW has to keep Legion units for later release points otherwise the line stalls and doesn't make money in the long term.

SamusDrake wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
No troops. Only tanks.

World of Tanks: The Horus Heresy.

You joke, but i would unironically play that game till the markings wore off the controller buttons.

Also: GW need to get on the virtual tabletop thing post-haste.

Once they have that they can develop an AI to do their playtesting - get the human playtesters to play against the AI to train it and then automate the extended playtesting process.

Then sell the AI to naval colleges for wargame training.

"GW should create Skynet" was not on my internet bingo card for today...

 Gert wrote:
"GW should create Skynet" was not on my internet bingo card for today...

If we are going to have skynet, I’d prefer for it’s core to be based on GW rules. Much better odds of humanity surviving the robot uprising that way.

I'd expect that Word Bearers champion's head would work well for Night Lords, too.

 Nevelon wrote:

 Gert wrote:
"GW should create Skynet" was not on my internet bingo card for today...

If we are going to have skynet, I’d prefer for it’s core to be based on GW rules. Much better odds of humanity surviving the robot uprising that way.

Except you remove logic and predictability. For every T-1 busy trying to drive up a wall, there’d be a T-1000 setting up an irresistible Night Club for the resistance and impersonating them after

No such luck regarding AI. John Carmack is already on the case so we're already doomed...

SamusDrake wrote:
No such luck regarding AI. John Carmack is already on the case so we're already doomed...

He quit Meta the other day, so who knows what he's doing now...

 ClockworkZion wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 tauist wrote:
Not a fan of the new WB helms. Has that sort of derpy flanderisque feel that belongs more in tacky 40K CSM sculpts than with HH. HH traitors usually have a bit more class than that IMO

Yeah, to me it feels like they tried to do inscribed symbols like you'd expect on WB, but they used the wrong sized tool and pushed it in to hard to create giant ravines in the armour.

The exact same idea with faint inscriptions I think would have looked good, especially since I assume these are resin so they should be able to do that sort of fine detail.

I think the intent is readability from a distance and making it easier for people to overpaint the deeper grooves.

Maybe, but I think they went a bit overboard even if that was their intention, the grooves are as deep and wide as the toe grooves, so they read as different armour segments rather than inscriptions or stylisation.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 tauist wrote:
Not a fan of the new WB helms. Has that sort of derpy flanderisque feel that belongs more in tacky 40K CSM sculpts than with HH. HH traitors usually have a bit more class than that IMO

Yeah, to me it feels like they tried to do inscribed symbols like you'd expect on WB, but they used the wrong sized tool and pushed it in to hard to create giant ravines in the armour.

The exact same idea with faint inscriptions I think would have looked good, especially since I assume these are resin so they should be able to do that sort of fine detail.

I think the intent is readability from a distance and making it easier for people to overpaint the deeper grooves.

Maybe, but I think they went a bit overboard even if that was their intention, the grooves are as deep and wide as the toe grooves, so they read as different armour segments rather than inscriptions or stylisation.

Eh, I'm okay with it. The MkIV ones were nigh unreadable at a distance and some exaggeration is needed to make it work further away.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
No such luck regarding AI. John Carmack is already on the case so we're already doomed...

He quite Meta the other day, so who knows what he's doing now...

Well, he's now doing AI. Setup his own company which is Keen Technologies AGI. He still helps out at Meta, as a tech guru.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 tauist wrote:
Not a fan of the new WB helms. Has that sort of derpy flanderisque feel that belongs more in tacky 40K CSM sculpts than with HH. HH traitors usually have a bit more class than that IMO

Yeah, to me it feels like they tried to do inscribed symbols like you'd expect on WB, but they used the wrong sized tool and pushed it in to hard to create giant ravines in the armour.

The exact same idea with faint inscriptions I think would have looked good, especially since I assume these are resin so they should be able to do that sort of fine detail.

I think the intent is readability from a distance and making it easier for people to overpaint the deeper grooves.

Maybe, but I think they went a bit overboard even if that was their intention, the grooves are as deep and wide as the toe grooves, so they read as different armour segments rather than inscriptions or stylisation.

Eh, I'm okay with it. The MkIV ones were nigh unreadable at a distance and some exaggeration is needed to make it work further away.

Fair enough, I haven't seen the MkIV ones in person, but looking at pictures of other peoples' models it's probably because the dark red used in the inscriptions doesn't contrast strongly against the slightly less dark red of the armour itself. Perhaps doing the inscriptions with a black ink, or contrasting by using a white ink or yellow ink would make them stand out more? They might have also benefited from not just being only text, as that is a bit busy and overly detailed.

But I think probably something part way between the new ones and the old ones would have been best.

I suspect the grooves are fine at actual model size, especially for painters who don't subscribe to the two thin coats mantra. My issue with this style of upgrade is more that the Mk.VI Marines are not just generic but overall so bland that when you introduce a massive amount of detail on at most two upgrade parts that is a stylistic departure from the rest of the model, the model is going to look disjointed. That's the impression I'm getting from the example model, even after the decals on the legs.

 Geifer wrote:
I suspect the grooves are fine at actual model size, especially for painters who don't subscribe to the two thin coats mantra. My issue with this style of upgrade is more that the Mk.VI Marines are not just generic but overall so bland that when you introduce a massive amount of detail on at most two upgrade parts that is a stylistic departure from the rest of the model, the model is going to look disjointed. That's the impression I'm getting from the example model, even after the decals on the legs.

Exactly this! I've always thought a MKVI armour is all about that tacticool minimalism. Overly busy looking details look much better with MKII, MKIII & MKV IMO