Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Jac "Baneblade" O'Bite
Joined
·
8,082 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey guys. Heres the update for August from FW.

Very short today, just a new tankl variation. This one is based on the Malcador, it does away with the heavy bolters and makes it a bit more versatile by giving you options for the sponsun and hull weapons.











Heres the link to the orginal page to get a more 3D look at it

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/malcbc.htm


Personally I think it looks a lot better than the HB version, not sure about its effectivness though.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
While I can appreciate the effectiveness of the more or less 360* simultaneous coverage of the heavy bolters on the Malcador, this version seems like it'd be a bit more effective overall. As battle tanks go, you want to be able to take on all comers-- it's essentially a mobile fortress, after all. Those are autocannons in the sponsons, so you've got anti-heavy infantry fire, a battle cannon (which is also anti-infantry, but in a pinch you can still shoot tanks with it...), and a lascannon on the front. And, if I remember correctly, the Malcador is a superheavy design, so all of those weapons are free to fire at the appropriate targets. The only real flaw of the design is that there's no way to directly cover the rear of the tank. Most armour has a 360* turret rotation, after all, and the battle cannon looks limited to about 180*. Not a major flaw, but one that may leave you inclined to sit near the board edge rather than advance and risk a quick unit whipping around behind to take a potshot at the rear armour without any immediate way of shooting it down without exposing a vulnerable area to the main battle line.

If nothing else, it looks more "tank-y" and less... almost orky than the standard Malcador. There's just something about the way the Malcador is configured that makes it look a little cobbled together. Maybe it's just how the heavy bolters are positioned.
 

·
Jac "Baneblade" O'Bite
Joined
·
8,082 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I'm not a fan of the orginal one either, like Son said, it doesn't look very Imperial. This one however is growing on me.
 

·
blahblahblahblah
Joined
·
6,663 Posts
I love it, you can the see the beginnings of the Leman russ in its design, and I love the idea of 3 Autocannons blazing away too
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
I really like, thinking infact that it would be a nice substitute for a Russ in a standard guard force.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Skcuzzlebumm said:
I really like, thinking infact that it would be a nice substitute for a Russ in a standard guard force.
Exactly what I was thinking.
Battlecannon, Las-cannon, 2xHB & a PM Heavy Stubber. Nice.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top