# New section on GW site: SPEARHEAD



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

GW's website has a section under the 40k expansions section titled "SPEARHEAD." As of this moment, (March 23, 2010) nothing is posted in it, but keep your eyes peeled as it will get filled up soon enough. 

*CLICK HERE​*


----------



## Sloan13 (Feb 16, 2009)

Yeah. I saw that last night, I can't wait to see what happens.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Ooh nice, they could well be expanding on it later 
Making it kinda like CoD, or Apocalypse, or Planetstrike.
It is an interesting way of playing after all.


----------



## fett14622 (Apr 29, 2008)

Get ready for some tank fighting. :grin:


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

fett14622 said:


> Get ready for some tank fighting. :grin:


And bring on the Carnifex broods!


----------



## BHound1981 (Feb 25, 2010)

Mmmm.... tanks.....


----------



## subtlejoe (Sep 23, 2008)

mmmmmmmmmm..... tastes like death.


----------



## Vanchet (Feb 28, 2008)

....................mmmmmmm lots of mmmmmmmms 
Librarian Furioso Dread frenzy


----------



## IntereoVivo (Jul 14, 2009)

Winterous said:


> Ooh nice, they could well be expanding on it later
> Making it kinda like CoD, or Apocalypse, or Planetstrike.
> It is an interesting way of playing after all.


Are you talking about the deployment type?

I could see it being more of a campaign oriented game-type like Planetary Empires but with actual rules vs just a board. Though thinking about it, why wouldn't they just expand Planetary Empires?

Dunno, but excited to see what happens.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

IntereoVivo said:


> Are you talking about the deployment type?
> 
> I could see it being more of a campaign oriented game-type like Planetary Empires but with actual rules vs just a board. Though thinking about it, why wouldn't they just expand Planetary Empires?
> 
> Dunno, but excited to see what happens.


It's a version of the game which would work WELL with a campaign.
I don't know what you mean by deployment type though...


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

This practically sucks for a lot of armies that are not marines or guard due to lack of vehicle variety.


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Stephen_Newman said:


> guard due to lack of vehicle variety.


*spits coffee*


----------



## IntereoVivo (Jul 14, 2009)

Ah, I didn't realize it was a game type already. Where can I find the rules for this?


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

IntereoVivo said:


> Ah, I didn't realize it was a game type already. Where can I find the rules for this?


http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=9500028a


----------



## Jisko888 (Mar 13, 2009)

Winterous said:


> *spits coffee*


Think it was in reference to most races not having the variety that marines or guard have <,<


----------



## Winterous (Mar 30, 2009)

Jisko888 said:


> Think it was in reference to most races not having the variety that marines or guard have <,<


..Aah, that makes sense.
*re-reads*
Yes yes, it would appear to be what he meant.


*runs away*


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

While I got what he meant the first time, when I saw what you had comprehended in your quote of him I completely understood your reaction, if it's any consolation.


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

*UPDATE....* sort of.

I was just poking around GW's site and noticed that the *"SPEARHEAD"* section under *"expansions"* was removed from the drop down menu. Is that a sign that it is close to release or that they screwed up and are postponing it? 

The link I posted in the op still works as of this posting though, dunno what that means. 

Those who are interested in this expansion might want to keep there eyes on it as it might be close... or not.


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

It's definitely next month. Advertised in WD lol.


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

Ah, very good. I haven't even picked up a WD in over 10 years because it is, 1) poop, and 2) too expensive for poop.


----------



## Viscount Vash (Jan 3, 2007)

This popped up 4 minutes agos on Twitter:

VoxCaster New blog post: Advance Order Imperial Guard and Eldar; Spearhead News Update; Jes Goodwin Concepts http://40k.me/bFpV9i


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

GW has it up on there site. Pre-order for eldar and Guard tanks and accessories: * CLICK HERE*


----------



## WarlordKaptainGrishnak (Dec 23, 2008)

this is good isnt it? weren't a few people abit hesitant that GW might not release a Manticore? and new Eldar Support Weapons are good as well, but what is this flashy gun (pictured below)

Grish


----------



## Creon (Mar 5, 2009)

VibroCannon


----------



## Classs (Jan 18, 2009)

Can't wait to try out the new nightspinner in epic tank battles.


----------



## fynn (Sep 19, 2008)

well, i wont be buying the LRBT (due to lack of weapon swapability), but i will hopefully pick up a manticore on the 5th (yay, day after my birthday)


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

wow, i did not realise that the manticore was going to be released as well, but i guess that is a bonus for guard players. liking the russ tank, might just pick one up to look pretty beside my wolves, but at €39, its a bit of a toughie, termies or russ, that is the question. anyway, i might have to get that command frame for the combi melta thingy. looks good, the eldar fire prism looks good


----------



## bishop5 (Jan 28, 2008)

Bah, was really hoping for a Manticore/Hydra kit - seeing as nobody uses Deathstrike missiles - but I am somewhat mollified by the Manticore kit being a lot better than I expected


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

OK I just had a nerdgasm looking at the new Manticore kit, the Eldar support weapon platforms look fantastic too.


----------



## bishop5 (Jan 28, 2008)

Ah, although it has just occured to me that the FW model which most people have at the moment has the missiles on a 360 degree turret mount, whereas this new kit is a fixed hull mount - cheeky nerf? :s


----------



## HOBO (Dec 7, 2007)

The FW Manticore model isn't open topped and looks it, whereas this plastic Manticore does look open topped, but actually isn't (by its description).

I prefer the FW one but I'll get one of GW's ones..it'll just be a different pattern.

The new Russ kit is OK, although all the barrels look terrible..the Vanquisher barrel is a very poor portrayal of what it is in the Fluff.


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 27, 2010)

I can't say I'm that excited.

Tank models look good and are always interesting projects to work on. However I've always felt that they are basically too large for 40K scale and instead of adding a tactical challenge to the game become little more than a mobile bunker and do not capture the manouverability of tanks in real warfare. 

Spearhead looks as if its not going to address this and will instead just be about crowding a table with tanks. Basically this means GW will sell lots of tank models, but are presenting a game where all you do is play traffic jams. if you look at the photo on the GW site, this is basically whats happening. I've spent enough of my life travellling dureing rush hour in citys to know that this is not what I want out of a wargame.

The only way a tank battle can be recreated is by reduceing the scale. This then allows manouverability and tactics, beyond simply putting a tank down and moveing it forward, on an average size games table. Epic scale recreates this very well, but sadly less and less people play this now.


----------



## Scathainn (Feb 21, 2010)

Or you could just use a big-ass table :biggrin:


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

Scathainn said:


> Or you could just use a big-ass table :biggrin:


That, and units in reserves will keep the table more "open" for maneuvering and such. With the lack of massed infantry models on the table it will also open the table up. I can see a 4'+6' table being more than enough for a fair sized tank game and a larger 4'+8' will be even more accommodating and maybe even more appropriate too. We'll see when the rules are published.


----------



## Stormbrow II (May 10, 2010)

While I'm glad to see models being released I'm not happy to see another one of these crappy background campaign books. When will GW realise they'd be better off releasing Codices for all of the armies and then print this crap to their hearts content. 

Cities of Death - fail.
Battle Missions - fail. 
Planetstrike - fail.


----------



## Stormbrow II (May 10, 2010)

While I'm glad to see models being released I'm not happy to see another one of these crappy background campaign books. When will GW realise they'd be better off releasing Codices for all of the armies and then print this crap to their hearts content. 

Cities of Death - fail.
Battle Missions - fail. 
Planetstrike - fail.


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

Stormbrow II said:


> While I'm glad to see models being released I'm not happy to see another one of these crappy background campaign books. When will GW realise they'd be better off releasing Codices for all of the armies and then print this crap to their hearts content.
> 
> Cities of Death - fail.
> Battle Missions - fail.
> Planetstrike - fail.


Actually, "Spearhead" isn't going to be a dedicated rule/expansion book, but rather, it is going to be released in White Dwarf magazine. That should make you happier.


----------



## Don_Keyballs (Jan 14, 2010)

I don't mind battle missions. It provides another aspect to the game then just the standard missions. Planetstrike is too unoranized to be fun and was just an attempt to resurect apoc. To make spearhead better they should re-release some apoc kits that had tanks come in sets of 3 for the price of 2 to actually provide some savings to the user. $60 for a shell of plastic is freaken steep and really discourages me from buying armor.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I disliked Battle Missions because it actually offers only about 1-2 scenarios that aren't simply permutations of Objectives and Kill Points, which is pretty poor considering that it was supposed to present a big change of scenery.

Also, you can get the scale of tank battles in 40k, you just need to play apocalypse with three 6'x4' boards put together, and 10 Leman Russ sweeping along one flank in a massed cavalry charge with Chimera support. We did it last weekend, and it was the first time in a VERY long time that I actually appreciated the visual impact of a battlefield, instead of just worrying about line of sight, distances etc. It looked awesome.

A normal 6'x4' isn't big enough for massed tank battles though.


----------

