We have 2 Rhinos. One loyal and one Chaos Rhino. It is the compendium which gives every armylist an "Armyname" suffix and lists the "Armyname" Same-unit as transportable in every armylist.

What we have is 20 (ok not really) different Dreadnoughts But they all have a defined role. CC, FF, Ranged Firepower, MW Firepower, Middle of them all.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

An interesting discussion. Generic stats and diverse models have worked for the Orks by virtue of the race. There are some places where we as a community have overdiversified - marines are one (how many statted Land Raiders are there?), IG are another (I love me my Russes, but are Exterminators really that different to standard Russes?). A healthy medium is what we should shoot for in most cases. We should stat not for variants, but for roles. Land Raider Crusaders and Redeemers are not so different they can't both 'counts as' crusaders. Thunderers could count as demolishers.

However.

This really doesn't inform the point of the original post. Let's try to keep to discussing the defining visual features of vehicles from the various Chaos factions. If you want, I'm willing to split off the current discussion into a new thread, as it does have merit.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

the way you tell a world eaters land raider from a thousand sons land raider, is one is red, and one is blue. maybe they have special doors, but they're basically the same
this should hold true for any vehicle that can be taken by multiple factions, or undivided.
if you painted a brass scorpion blue and gold and called it rubric scorpion, it would look right at home alongside a thousand sons army

specialist daemon engines can have their own models. but i prefer for them to be largely generic in visual affiliations, because it increases the scope for use. some would be a stretch to genericify (silver towers, painted red and dripping blood, called "gore spires" would be a stretch. pus-cannon superheavy tanks are pretty obviously nurglesque) but most can and should require no work to fit into a black legion scheme and look good

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

Have to admit i was a bit confused where the aim of the question was, in casting and sculpting but then talking about speed and CC ?

Modle wise, nothing prescriptive, because chaos is a spectrum, it might be a tank just turned, with just a chaos/god symbol on painted over the imperial colours. At the other extreme you have a fully a full corrupted, disfigured carcass of a vehicle, leaking deamonic energy.

Also, Khorne (as opposed to world eaters or something more specific) does not have to be CC, simply destruction and carnage.

Stats wise, i'm favor of abstraction ( eg get rid of those LR varints in marine lists, just use proxy modles) but I know taht's a minority view and many people like chasing after the whims of GW/40k

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

I like Land Raider Crusaders in Black Templar armies, as they're an iconic unit for BTs. But other than that, I agree with you - there are a bit too many variants of tanks.

Model design should be driven by the defining characteristics of each faction. Even if there is no in game effect, some things should always inform design. Nurgle vehicles are decaying, but that decay means they are built more solidly to begin with. This is something that can be seen in the design of a model. Similarly, even if a Slaaneshi Engine or Vehicle has no increased speed it should look faster, more lithe, than an Undivided Engine.

So while the rules we incorporate at this scale and model design are not neccessarily correlated, model design can and should be influenced by the rules that only show up at larger scales - abstracting rules does not equal abstracting models. Orks are a great example of this.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

This.

Having float/fly as god specific does not work IMO as you are relying too much on Thousand Sons as representing the 'norm'. It may be all we have at present, however Fly/float was a general Chaos gift and while you may think that Nurgle should not float, there was a very memorable character in the movies Dune/Starwars who did exactly that

No reason why Chaos vehicles themselves cannot also be memorable, hence why I am against the stereotype that gives anything more than skulls, pestilence, excess and mystery.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

I'm not trying to portray Tzeentch as having a monopoly on flying - Nurgle Blight Drones do too. However, they have a greater proportion of flying vehicles than other powers. Silver towers, Doomwings and Firebeaks (is that the name?), Screamers and disks (yes I know they're the same thing), as well as others. They also have a tendancy to have a less clearly defined mothod of flight - this speaks to the "mystery" aspect. How do Screamers maintain lift?

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

I'm with Maddoctor on the different "generations" of chaos engine designs.

For an extended discussion of the aesthetics of Tzeentch vehicles, I'd point to the Tzeentch Daemon Engine thread.

Khorne: While I agree overall with Spectrar's characterization, in previous incarnations, Khorne did have a sort of "grind them to dust" approach to ranged combat. Mostly, this was embodied in the Chaos Squats and the related Khornate daemon engines like Cannons of Khorne and the Doomblaster. I always saw that as utterly efficient, ruthless and cruel approach to warfare, just as suited to "Blood for the Blood God" as close combat berzerkers.

Yup. Khorne is basically Big Freakin' Guns (if nor Big then Many) on tracks/legs or Big Freakin' Knifes/Clubs/Whatever on tracks/legs.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Aesthetics for the four gods
Khorne-

Binding straps, gleaming oil, plain, unfussy and unsubtle, almost business like compared to undivided chaos. Limited decoratve inlays in bone and skull motifs. Emphasis upon shredding in CC and heavy bore cannons.
Other minor influences are snarling dogs, fire, furnaces and blackened chimneys, brass steel, blackened chains. Bat wings and echoes thereof.

Slaanesh- Whimsical and capricious. Heavily influced by Eldar aesthetics, graceful curves, panel lines, gemstones. CC a factor again, but reliant on speed not strength: katana and rapiers. Silk canopies, contrasted by hints of decay: beautiful torso on a caterpillars body, sleek war tank with ant head.
Other minor influences: Bull head, tongues/tentacles, eldaresque glyphs, golden chains, art nouveau, fish scales.

Nurgle- Ironic toughness. Normally larger, bulging and more organic then others. Nurgle’s domain is in the flesh. Also the most likely to use archaic materials: large monolithic wheels, heavy wooden beams, pitted cast iron plates ect
Other minor influences: flies, maggots, mould, organic bulging contours.

Tzeentech:
most unearthly and unnatural. Opposite to Nurgle. Often covered in Glyhps, runes or other writing. Least likely to follow bio-mimicry i think, but the most likely to have open cyborgisaton instead. Most likely of gods to have architectural flavor to constructions.
Minor influences: electricity, pseudo-circuitry, lab equipment, crystal, copper and polished steel.

_________________
My shifting projects

I am with Maddoctor, I think he has hit the nail on the head on factions and their attributes.

Cheers
Aaron

I would add in avian, flames (surrounded-by, not decorated-with) and disc/floating ideas. To a lesser extent I would include piscine, fungal and "third eye" themes.

I think Undivided in some ways have stolen Khorne's clothes. Modern Khorne is just homicidal maniacs with chain axes, but it used to be all about brutality and destruction in war, right?

Undivided used to be very vague, if mentioned at all, and certainly not with its own aesthetic. But now it's the most "pragmatic" of all the styles. Hellfire Cannons are a good example, I think - big guns used to be Khornate (Cannons of Khorne?), but now they're undivided.

I agree- I was starting to find TL/SM2 overly clunky and complicated. But E40k not only swung too far in the other direction of uniformity of stats, thus becoming fairly bland IMO, it also got rid of the old Unit Card method for army selection- which everyone at my local club loved.

I have always said that EA got the perfect blend of SM2 and E40K.

As to EA being W40k for tight arses. I actually have grown to really like W40k 5th ed and think it is their best ruleset yet. (I am thus a bit apprehensive about forthcoming 6th ed). However W40k codexes are often poorly written and too easy for power gamers to exploit loop-holes.

So I play W40k but only with people that I know have the same approach to the game as me. So picking units more because of the background fluff or because they look cool, rather than being optimised points-efficient.....

GW have done many cool models recently for W40k- it is great if we can bring these to EA, especially if they fill gaps in the EA model selection or further reinforce the relevant army background and identity.

Cheers

James