Why did we go from a badass death machine to knight 2: the electric boogaloo?
>>44268433
Best B8o my m8o, have a reply!
Remember anons: sage goes in the option field!
>>44268433
Cheaper to reuse existing moulds than to make new ones, probably.
>>44268433
Definitely Bait, but I'll bite anyway.
'Badass Death machine'-Warlord is the Lucius Pattern Warlord, which is more boxy and intimidating than the regular patterns, similar to the Lucius Warhound.
The other is the Mars-Alpha Pattern Warlord, which is based off of the original titan models in the first editions of Epic. The Lucius pattern actually came later than the Mars in terms of fluff as well.
>>44268592
That's a Titan? oh, OH! That's what OP is talking about. I thought it was a Knight, though I am quite sleep deprived right now.
>>44268592
But the Lucius Pattern Warlord had been well established by this point as /the/ Warlord in the fluff and artwork - even the epic scale miniature was Lucius pattern (if not the first edition epic one).
It's a rather drastic shift backwards by GW, where the Lucius stood out compared to the Warhound and Reaver Titans.
>>44268474
Mouldwise it's completely different, even if it shares design similarities.
The actual reason is probably because every other FW Titan, aside fromt he OOP Lucious Warhound (shame, as I thought that looks better than the Mars pattern one), is the Mars pattern, which are characterized by the rounded carapace, so it makes sens to keep the style for their latest Titan. The fact that the Knight kits also share a similar eastethic is a bonus (I wonder if there are other patterns of Knight chassis as well; a Lucius version of the existing Knights might look cool).
>>44268433
Because that artwork is on the lucius pattern. The model is of the mars pattern, which is also from rogue trader/second edition days.
>>44268433
Why do you care, its not like you can afford one.
>>44268433
Because Mars pattern is the default.
>>44268433
those things are redonkulous
almost two thousand dollars and almost 3000 points and bigger than a toddler
>>44269132
This. It's almost more terrain than army, you just leave it in one place and roll dice for 6 turns.
>>44269277
One does not simply move the holy godslayer machine.
>>44269277
>6 turns
>implying they'll last that long
6 void shields and can't be locked into melee
>>44269592
If your opponent knows that you're bringing it in, they'll train everything on it and have a Valdor for good measure.
>>44268433
Because fluff > actual implementations
>>44268433
FW made the Mars pattern.
The Epic version is the Lucius pattern.
There's an official mars/lucius for almost every titan class, I'm pretty sure.
>>44270795
Not for Emperor. There's images of a conversion, but nothing official.
I don't remember if the old wolf head warhound had a pattern to it, or if it's just a Mars pattern that has been retconned out of existence by the new FW Mars pattern.
>>44270886
Well, the main three titan classes, at least. I know for a fact the reaver got a lucius version in epic.
>or if it's just a Mars pattern that has been retconned out of existence by the new FW Mars pattern.
I'm going to go with that. Kind of like how the epic mars reaver and the old titanicus warlord are replaced with the new FW ones.
>>44268817
>It's a rather drastic shift backwards by GW, where the Lucius stood out compared to the Warhound and Reaver Titans.
Because the warhounds and reavers were Mars pattern.
The mars patterns warhounds and reavers are hugely more popular so obviously it makes sense to complete the set and make a mars warlord, since it's the most common pattern of titan and it makes no sense that there are models of mars reavers but not mars warlords. On top of that, the box titans always looked a bit out of place in 40k, not enough gothy weirdness.
Besides, like you said yourself, the first epic warlords were mars patterns.
>>44268433
>>44268474
>>44268817
>>44270795
You're asking the wrong question, but I guess you're too young to know what you're talking about. The real question is why we went from the ornate gothic as fuck 40k look to a boxy battletech reject.
Real titans have curves.
>>44271330
>The real question is why we went from the ornate gothic as fuck 40k look to a boxy battletech reject.
Because if I'm remembering right, when the warlord was due for a resculpt in epic, they'd already done up the new (at the time) lucius warhound for 40k and followed suit.
If you're asking why FW did the flat panels on that? It's because large flat panels are easier than curves, and FW was still learning the ropes.
>you're too young to know what you're talking about
kiddo pls
>>44270942
>epic mars reaver and the old titanicus warlord
But those at least have some resemblance with the new ones. Like people looked at the new warlord and immediately recognized it as the beetleback warlord from epic.
>>44271330
Is curvy really all that gothic? Gothic is supposed to be kind of squat with a lot of arches, at least in the case of cathedrals.
>>44271330
Neither the lucius or the mars pattern titans are gothic. Only the Emperor is proper gothic.
If you don't see how boxy design is Imperial, don't look at any Imperial vehicle ever. Especially the flyers.
>>44271990
>squat
Think you mean tall. Gothic architecture is all around tall spires and pointy arches. But yeah, would not call it curvy.
>>44272020
This. Titans should be a bit clunky and boxy anyway, sort of like an overlarge dreadnought.
The knights are an exception mostly because they're so individual and come from very feudal worlds.
>>44272070
You might argue for curves with the arches, but overall it's rather boxy near the base, and raises up to a more pointed tip like you said - it's all meant to draw the eye upwards towards heaven.
