| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| Question about the Battle damage rule http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4507 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | WWII44 [ August 30th, 2013, 12:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Question about the Battle damage rule |
I was contemplating doing an AU for the Orks fro Warhammer 40k( for those of you not farmilliar with it look here: http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Orks) but I come across the problem of the fact that Ork weapons and veihicles(and subsequently warships) are basically ramshackled plies of scrap cobled together from burnt out wrecks salvaged from the battle field. That being said would this go against the Buckets "No Battle damage rule"? Here are some examples of Ork technology ![[ img ]](http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101101072723/warhammer40k/images/e/e0/Ork_Gargants.gif) ![[ img ]](http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120526110259/warhammer40kfanon/images/d/df/Ork_burna_bommer.jpg) ![[ img ]](http://www.40korigins.com/40KOrigins/image.axd?picture=2009%2F6%2Fbattlewagon.gif)
|
|
| Author: | klagldsf [ August 30th, 2013, 1:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
Since this falls outside the purview of the typical Shipbucket style anyway, I wouldn't worry about it. I'd just post it in the non-Shipbucket forum. Also note that those drawings are already - kinda sorta - close to the Shipbucket scale anyway. |
|
| Author: | WWII44 [ August 30th, 2013, 1:23 am ] | |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule | |
Also note that those drawings are already - kinda sorta - close to the Shipbucket scale anyway. I'm not planing on drawing stompas and gargants, I was thinking about actuall seagoing warships. |
||
| Author: | Colosseum [ August 30th, 2013, 1:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
The rule applies only to real life ships. You wouldn't draw the sinking General Belgrano, would you? I would ask that someone from the staff codifies the "no damaged ships" rule as it seems quite a bit of people don't understand it. Which is really baffling to me as the rule is very simple and with only a little bit of common sense it can be easily adhered to. |
|
| Author: | WWII44 [ August 30th, 2013, 2:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
Ok I'll keep that in mmind in the future. But what board would I put the ships in? |
|
| Author: | Colosseum [ August 30th, 2013, 2:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
Use your brain. Are they in Shipbucket scale and style? Then they would go in the Alternate Universe board as they are "Alternate Universe" (warhammer) drawings.  Things like this are pretty simple when you just apply your common sense. What's the worst that could happen? A mod will move the thread... |
|
| Author: | KHT [ August 30th, 2013, 6:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
This could be interesting... I remember trying my hands at an Imperator Titan at some occassion, but gave up becouse of the fact that there are no sources that state any deffinitive size. They could be anywhere between 40 and 100 meters high... Anyways, good luck with these. 
|
|
| Author: | emperor_andreas [ August 30th, 2013, 7:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
I'd like clarification on this rule myself. Example: My friend and fellow IJN buff BB1987 and I collaborated on a drawing showing CA Myoko as she appeared in 1945. Does she have damage in the drawing? Yes (a missing stern), but there are no shell holes, bomb craters, scorch marks, etc.. Does that qualify as a 'no-no' drawing or not? |
|
| Author: | Rhade [ August 30th, 2013, 7:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
1: In that chart there is a Warhound Titan, probably Mars pattern with double plasma balstguns. It's part of Collegia Titanica and there is no sources about greenskins caputre one. It's too big, Reaver Battle Titan of the Mars pattern have 22.3 meters height and Warhound is 1/3 smaller. I would say that Warhound is about 14-16 meters tall. 2: There is absolutely NO size standardization in case of greenskins, bigger is better. Stompas can be 20, 30, 8.7 meters tall or anyway the Mekboy wants. 3: Ork ships, vechicels or anything are pure kitybash. They get and melt everything with everything just to ad more shootas and rokit launchers. And yes, size in W40K are... well... crap. If you try to aplly datas from core books you will get wierd stuff. |
|
| Author: | WWII44 [ August 30th, 2013, 3:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Question about the Battle damage rule |
what if I were to do something like say some how the orks managed to get a hold of the wreck of the Arizona battleship(or some how got anceint blueprints and/or documentation of her) and rebuilt her in their "orky" fasion. Would this go against the rule? |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|