# Eldar Tanks-Picsture-Prism an NightSpinner



## Vanchet (Feb 28, 2008)

*Eldar Tanks-Pictures-Prism an NightSpinner*

As Heretics everywhere been knowing New Guard an Eldar Tanks are on their way
Finding for BoLS-we have pictures of 2 Eldar Tanks: The newly made Fire Prism and the Night spinner

http://www.hiboox.fr/go/images/image-perso/1272156595969,098e61e60bc1096f6fc49748e2f33b70.jpg.html

http://www.hiboox.fr/go/images/image-perso/1272156636203,2386ddd328d73882c4261593eb726455.jpg.html

My Opion on them so far is uncertain-not sure if the prism is a good or bad change


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Wow, that Fire Prism is hideous, though I like the Night Spinner a lot.


----------



## Desolatemm (Feb 2, 2008)

Weird... double posted...


----------



## Desolatemm (Feb 2, 2008)

I love the re-scuplt, reminds me of the old FW Cobra! Excited, night spinner... not so much unless the rules are COMPLETELY different than IA, good model though.,..


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

hopefully we get a rule change on the night spinner. Also I do not like the way the new Prism looks.


----------



## dthwish09 (Oct 15, 2009)

cannot wait for the new eldar codex!


----------



## Ordo Xeno Commander (Jan 17, 2007)

I do like the new death spinner. Looks pretty ruthless. The Fire Prism is a bit more.. meh.


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

The Bloody Fuck did they do to the Prism???? It looks like a mix between A Super Heavy and the Spawn of satan.


----------



## WarlordKaptainGrishnak (Dec 23, 2008)

SPAWN OF SATAN!!!!!!!!!!

they got bored and got high and did finger paintings ala new FP


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Luckily for me there is still an old fire prism left in the local store so I am definitely going there some time soon.


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

With the prism, the gun just looks over extended and flimsy, rather than elegant or powerful. It's like a gun pieced together from 2 other guns. The actual parts of the weapon all look ok and well sculpted, but the overall effect is pretty poor...


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Ugly ugly ugly ugly new models. To name just a few problems: the extended hull is going to break soo easily, the Prism turret is now as long as the hull itself (just to make transporting it even harder than it already is) and the Night Spinner doesn't look like a barrage weapon, at all. Hopefully this indicative of a rules change to be more like a Hellhound or something (which we still don't need, but is better than an "artillery" piece).

On a 1-10 ratio then I think I would award them -2. now my Eldar are almost certain to remain on the shelves until a new codex comes round.


----------



## spudboy (Jun 13, 2008)

Fire prism... yick, sorry. Nothing good I can say about it, other than to hope it looks better up close and in person.

The nightspinner looks fine, but I am wondering about its rules...

Either way, the new turret looks great on both. Just that long pointy thing on the prism... yeesh.


----------



## Sytus (Aug 27, 2009)

That fire prism needs new ramming rules, just for that weapon. Brings a new meaning to "lance" weaponry.

I do quite like the night spinner.


----------



## Gog (May 27, 2009)

anyone else spot on the nightspinner pic the text to the left eith the comment (with AP-) it dont sound like its had a rules change.


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

Its going to be ap- regardless as its firing the same sort of weapon as the other wire based ap- weaponns the eldar use

If the spinner is used as hellhound ill be tempted, the the prism is awful and looks like they had a spare piece of plastic and just streched it.

TBH I'm bitterly dissapointed in both, and prefer the FW kit for the nightspinner


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

Night Spinner looks nice.

Fire Prism has been ruined, honestly. It looks like the Eldar needed to compensate so shoved a thing on the end of the crystal.... RAMMING SPEED!


----------



## your master (Jun 14, 2008)

although im happy that the eldar have got a new toy i cant see why its the night spinner like the sculpt but you got to be crazy to want to use it ap-??????? hasnt games workshop done case studies you would think they would at least of see how many forge world death spinners were sold or how many heavy weapons platforms with death spinners are sold:angry: i actually do like the fire prism though imho


----------



## spudboy (Jun 13, 2008)

My quiet hope is that this isn't 2 new products, just one with a choice on the sprue.


----------



## Desolatemm (Feb 2, 2008)

Thank you! finally someone else likes the model! I think it is much more along the line of an Eldar weapon instead of some rediculiegantic crystal. Honestly I loved the FW cobra and this really seems to fit my vision of the Eldar. Hey, it could even be counts as for a cobra in apoc. imho.









The prism cannon reminds me of Trigun, Vash's mutated arm, cannon...thing...


----------



## Bubblematrix (Jun 4, 2009)

That fireprism is truly gastly, it looks like the sculptor really didnt know what the fuck they were trying to achieve, the half barrel point is a crap homage to the original - they seemed to be trying to make it something different but couldnt bring themselves to move away from the original. The net effect being a heap of crap.

The nightspinner looks ok, imho not as nice as the FW one, but ok all the same. As Gog pointed out however it seems to still have AP(-) making it a pointless waste of a release. If GW sell more than a handful of these I will be hugely surprised, toss model or toss tank.

This is the biggest letdown I have ever experienced from GW, really really dissapointed as it was an opportunity to get people dusting off old eldar armies - these two are more likely to get them binning them.


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

The Fire Prism could've used a barrel. It just didn't need one quite that big. Or phallic. I bet it's pretty easy to leave that bit off, though-- it looks like the prism crystal is its own bit, and the end of the barrel is another bit. So you could potentially leave the length of the barrel off, put the end thing on the crystal, and call it a day.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

I like them both, never liked the fire prism as it was , the new model is a serious improvement in design in my opinion, also looks like both options are gonna be in one box as the turret is the same for both, could even be modular like the guard tanks. 
The design matches the current range nicely, the old fireprism looked crap, was a bad design and scratched the hull because it was so damn heavy, yes its phallic but so is the rest of the range.


----------



## Bubblematrix (Jun 4, 2009)

I guess it's personal taste then, but I will categoricly not be using the new fire prisms, I will buy old ones which dont look like some monkey home build or cut the stupid cannon off and sculpt some prisms like the old ones.

The nightspinner imho doesn't improve on the old one (which I kinda liked) and by the snippet next to it looks like it has the same rules as the apocalypse one - which renders it pointless.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

to be honest i would also like a better photo and to see the kit, for those with the phallic issue it may be possible to loose the long barrel and just have the clear prism, will be interesting to see if they have recut the main hull sprue too, the current hull parts are starting to get very tired but they have been around for 13 years(was reading the white dwarf the other day that shows the whole process of the design and production of the falcon). 
Looking at it again its growing on me more, i like how the turret has encompassed the gubbins and just the business ends of the weapons is on show for both variants, plus the rear of the turret and the engines look like they have some flare going on.


----------



## Me-dea (Mar 10, 2010)

So its really a Nightspinner that we will get :no:  :alcoholic: :scare: :cray:
Im soo happy that I buyed my 2 prisms. But in fact the new prism looks more Eldarish: elegant, long, can pierce tank window and driver in ramming . The piece i dont like is the turret weapon mounting in front instead of side.


----------



## Lord Reevan (May 1, 2008)

If the actual crystal part of the prism cannon was taken out I think it would look quite nice. Wouldn't be as long and wouldn't have a bulge near the start of it which is the main thing that bothers me... might not be as prism-y looking but I dislike the idea of a giant crystal being the main armament of a tank... The night spinner I like the model equally as much as the FW one.... Although rules wise I think it would be much better suited ot something like a guard punisher type weapon. bucketloads of ap - shots


----------



## Masked Jackal (Dec 16, 2009)

The turret looks like it should be pretty easy to convert so you don't have the crystal on there, then I think it would look a lot better.


----------



## Gog (May 27, 2009)

Lord Reevan said:


> but I dislike the idea of a giant crystal being the main armament of a tank...


But a Prism tank is a tank with a gun built around the soul stone of a warrior Its inherantly meant to have a big crystal in it, or so Im lead to belive by fluff and people comments in the past


----------



## The emperors chosen (Feb 27, 2010)

While the new fire prism does seem more "eldary"(hey I just invented a word,cool), I don't like it. It seems as if it's two weapons, and I prefer the previous one, where you know, it actually was a PRISM


----------



## yanlou (Aug 17, 2008)

the fire prism does look a bit ugly, i like the nightspinner tho, 
if i was to get the new fire prism tank id convert it so the crystal is intergarted with turret just behind the gun mount and just add the barrel,


----------



## Desolatemm (Feb 2, 2008)

I would have rather saw I Firestorm than a Nightspinner as neither the falcon or the prism can match it in effective shots. The nightspinner on the other hand just lays down Ap - templates... the prism has a better template as is... Yeah, there has to be something special they will through in. Maybe super effectiveness against other skimmers? like the Hydra? Or it looses the template for many many shots? We'll have to see in a couple months, but I wouldn't be suprised if the rules aren't exactly what we expect them to be.


----------



## Vanchet (Feb 28, 2008)

I think it makes it like on e of those cases where in movies they use diamionds an fix them in a doomsday weapon 
We're Just either Missing Bond or Batman


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Im not very impressed over the extremely long barrel on the Prism Cannon either, Id probably try to cut it off right after the Prism too if possible. But thats not my main beef with this new sculpt....

It does somehow look, like Bubblematrix said, like this is some sort of thing noone had interest of doing, and the result aint that grand at all. Im a bit sceptical to the extended hull, but thats very likely something one can skip. 
The turret though, it sucks. I like the ide how the guns are more integrated into the turret, but the design of the turret is way to bulky. It looks like some fat shit one would find on IG tanks. It looks oversized and shit, not sleek and aerodynamic like the rest of the tank. And if it wasnt back heavy before it will be now...

The spinner is a bit better, but still suffering from the oversized turret syndrome:stop:


Not the best thing they have made in a long time...


----------



## Unforgiven302 (Oct 20, 2008)

The main models are the exact same. The turret, main hull, everything except the weapons are the same. 

Looks like one kit, two options. Both look like poop in my opinion.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

So, 4 pages of comments by lots of different people, and the consensus is...

GW YOU SUCK AT ELDAR!

No wonder everyone plays Space Marines when they give Xenos players crap like this...

Having got that out of my system I will now ignore this release totally. And hope they don't pull shit like this on us when we get a new codex release.


----------



## Styro-J (Jan 20, 2009)

Now if the Fire Prism gets super Lance or Melta effects I will feel better about it, doesn't seem too bad though. (S 15 on a ram?) Thinking "Magnets" to solve storage issues.

The Spinner would be great against Hordes from across the board with multiple large blasts or something. I am just wondering where the whole "Spinner is unique amongst" is leading at the bottom of that picture, hopefully an awesome special rule and not fluff.


----------



## Weirdboyz (Apr 12, 2009)

Styro-J said:


> Now if the Fire Prism gets super Lance or Melta effects I will feel better about it, doesn't seem too bad though. (S 15 on a ram?)


I am doubting that they will change existing codex rules for the Fire Prism. Instead, I see them providing players with rules to use for the Night-spinner and leaving the Prism as is.

Which is stupid, because the Fire Prism can do everything that the FW 'Spinner can, only better. Here is hoping you are right about a rules update for the 'Spinner, Styro.


----------



## spudboy (Jun 13, 2008)

This is probably the best we can hope for:

Spinner is TL and pinning, at the very least (not much compensation, but hey), and is cheaper than other options. Transport capacity would be a plus, but I'm not holding my breath here. Ability to DS, or perhaps have options for a locator beacon ala SM for deep striking Spiders would be nice.

Prism is somehow improved with, say, more shot volume for regular (dispersed) shots. Heavy 2, perhaps.


----------



## Styro-J (Jan 20, 2009)

Maybe something like this: "Spinner is unique amongst" Eldar ships as it is the only one to utilize Warp Pack technology similar to that of the Warp Spiders.

I could think of a few uses for something like that. How it works exactly would have to be a bit different. But the fragmented text to the side is half about the spiders it seems so that could be a possibility. I'd say Deepstrike, and maybe some kind of Deepstrike redeployment thing. That could be handy with a transport option.

The Fire Prism bit I mentioned earlier was just out of envy, I want a S 10 AP 1 Lance. Everyone else has one!


----------



## Syzyx (Mar 25, 2008)

It may just be me but the long barrel on the Fire Prism looks pretty good. But the Night Spinner just looks awful. All bulbous and tremendously inelegant.


----------



## Daniel Harper (May 25, 2008)

Both tanks get a thumbs up from me. I'm sorry but I like them. We'll just have to wait until theres better pictures released. Now bring on the IG sneak peaks?


----------



## goobi2 (Jun 1, 2009)

It almost looks like they tried to make the last Phoenix Lords in Tank form... Hmm....


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

The Night Spinner or whatever it's called looks jaw droppingly awesome, the Prism on the other hand, not so good. I like the crystal and I like the barrel, but the two elements together look comical, almost orky, in the sense that it looks like they've just gaffer taped two weapons together.


----------



## Desolatemm (Feb 2, 2008)

Anyone consider if the nightspinners will be squadrons? If they are dirt cheap and even with no transport capacity, a squadron of dedicated, barrage anti-horde would be worth while imho.


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

The New Fire Prism makes me want to kill children and Use there Brains to beat the Sculptor to death. Safe to say i will NEVER RUN that model in my eldar army....


----------



## bishop5 (Jan 28, 2008)

I quite like them... :shok:


----------



## Tossidin (Dec 10, 2008)

I would need to see the prism from more angles, but I must admit that I think it looks piss ugly at the moment. I hope something changes my mind on it, as it would be really nice to change out the metal prism


----------



## Bubblematrix (Jun 4, 2009)

"Spinner is unique amongst"... Eldar ships in that it has no role in Eldar armies because AP(-) sucks balls


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

If they changed it to be a bit like the Frag Cannon, maybe 

S6 AP - , Rending, Ordnance 3, Barrage, Large Blast. 

Maybe that's hoping for a bit much. 

Aramoro


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

DOesn't the NightSpinner have a transport capacity of 6? I'm sure I read it in the IA Apoc book they have being sold in GW stores and they cost about 110pts in that, as I said I'm almost certain they can hold 6 models for transport measures!


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Indeed, lets have our long range artillery transport our troops to the front!

I don't see them keeping the Night Spinner as a twin linked shadow weaver. It would make it utterly useless in every conceivable way. Even if it could transport 6 guys. If it was BS, S7 and Ordinance then it might be a nice alternative to popping transports with getting the 2 d6 pick the highest thing. 

Aramoro


----------



## asianavatar (Aug 20, 2007)

The nightspinner looks great. The Fire prism though, Oh gawd, what did they do to that thing, it looks so stupid. Fluff wise it doesn't make sense either, wasn't one of the abilities of the prism was that it could fire into another tank's prism to "charge" up the beam. How they hell is that suppose to happen now with a the crystal hiding among a web of supports. Worst model in years.

If I had that model I would probably drop the whole barrel and just add the clear crystal bit that is at the end of it straight to the "crystal" part of the weapon.


----------



## elkhantar (Nov 14, 2008)

AP - is not so bad as you make it to be, the rest of the weapon stats should be taken into account too. 

One of my armies is nids, and I don't complain about high # of shots, low AP weapons. What does AP4-5 provide vs all the MEQs out there (about 80% of the armies you'll ever face)? AP - won't make any difference. (Ok, so it does vs vehicles, but what are you doing with your fire dragons and bright lances then?)

It's not like cover is too difficult to get in 5th ed, or like the poor orks and gaunts are going to make the save more than 1/6th of the time.

Eldar tanks have the mobility and resilience to choose their targets most of the time, so if the points cost is suitable to the final weapon stats, there could be a place for nightspinners.


----------



## Cyklown (Feb 8, 2010)

elkhantar said:


> AP - is not so bad as you make it to be, the rest of the weapon stats should be taken into account too.
> 
> One of my armies is nids, and I don't complain about high # of shots, low AP weapons. What does AP4-5 provide vs all the MEQs out there (about 80% of the armies you'll ever face)? AP - won't make any difference. (Ok, so it does vs vehicles, but what are you doing with your fire dragons and bright lances then?)
> 
> ...


Your fire dragons are killing things at point-blank range in a powerfull by throwaway manner. Your brightlances are busy being worse than a lascannon at anything short of AV 13, with worse range and pricier cost. Ap- makes it, with the (possible) exception of warp spiders (due to volume of shots) fairly useless against anything with an AV.

We already HAVE heavy support options that are better than the Nightspinner at killing vehicles + MCs, and we already have vehicles that are better at killing infantry. We have vehicles that are _both_.

If you get to pick your targets, then Fire Prisms are better every time. If you're trying to desperately pour firepower into something, Falcons are generally better.

If the Nightspinner keeps it's ap-, it's stats are borderline-close to the FW ones and it eats a heavy support slot then it's going to be unplayable trash. It could cost 80 points. It'd still be garbage because the opportunity cost represented by the loss of something as valuable as a HS slot would be unconciousable.

We're talking about an army that would happily squadron it's vehicles. We'd be getting a good deal for it if we had to pay for the "virtual spirit stones" that it came with.


----------



## Bubblematrix (Jun 4, 2009)

I think the issue is simply that an AP(-) tank in a HS slot for the Eldar would have to be incredibly cheap or hit many many targets to justify taking a Fireprisms slot.

The Apocalypse nightspinner is pretty much useless, I have never seen one used and for good reason. So unless the standard 40k one is drastically altered it would suck. Also I see it highly unlikely that it will radically differ from the apocalypse one.

I just hope that GW have had more sense than to release a model for the NS on the back of FW sales which occur because people a) like the model and b) its one of the cheapest FW models for Eldar so Eldar players wanting a FW kit are likely to go for it and not c) its actually useful in a game of 40k.

A few things which might make it more palatable - if its cheap as heck and comes in squadrons, it is in the FA slot, it has some combination effect like a fireprism which allows a barage of templates each increasing in strength like the fireprism


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

Talking purely about the models themselves, I've noticed that in both pictures the engines are flared out at the rear. Vectored Engines maybe? Possibly the new sprue may contain extra parts for all the vehicle upgrades.
Also, I've noted that there are an extra two panels at the rear of the wings. Purely cosmetic though, I presume.
I have to say, I do like the new turret. It's very reminiscent of the Forgeworld Scorpion Heavy Grav Tank. And I'd like to think that that's a clue that they're unifying the look of all the Eldar Grav Tanks ready for a Super Heavy Scorpion/Cobra release.

Here's hoping...


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Unlikely but how are 2 prism cannons supposed to connect beams with a giant goofy cannon in the way.

IF the rules for the nightspinner are exactly the same then why not just say buy the apocalypse rule book instead of making rules for it (It is more GW since they make more money than a 4-50 mag and reignite interest in apocalupse again)

Secondly the rules suck at the moment for the nightspinner and need a dramatic overhaul (or maybe this is why they are a dying race?)


----------



## jigplums (Dec 15, 2006)

im liking the models


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

Just thought I'd bring up um if you look at the picture of the Night Spinner in the text right next to it, it mentions the weapon is AP-.....yeah so....yeah


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

I agree that the night spinner would work great in the FA slot more so - as with it's transport ability pack it with 6 fire dragons, move it up the board, unload the dragons - make them shoot the land raider or whatever enemy transport it is and use the night spinner templates and shuriken cannons/catapults to clean up the troops inside. 

Also I've noticed alot of complaints about the new Fire Prism gun - you can 1) shorten it for the sake of making it look like the older cannon or 2) use it as it now has an even longer range than before by about 3-4" due to the extended cannon as you fire from the tip of the turret, yes they have good range already but more is never a bad thing!

On a model note I like that they are changing the tanks bit by bit the turret first, who knows the tanks may become thinner and sleeker in the new codex whenever they decided they need to redo the army again and the tanks may start looking more like the FW super heavy styles.


----------



## Ordo Xeno Commander (Jan 17, 2007)

I honestly think the nightspinner's cannons will go the way of the punisher cannon on the leman russ. Lots of AP- shots. Then again I don't know much about the Eldar or what GW is doing, so thats my speculation.


----------



## Garven Dreis (Oct 26, 2009)

Wow, I'm not a fan of the Night Spinner, but the heavier barrel looks a bit different for the Prism (Sorry to you veteran Eldar fans!)


----------



## PanzerPig (Apr 15, 2008)

On the models themselves, the more I look at them the more I like them. The Fire Prism at first glance just didn't look right but I actually quite like it now, looks far sleeker than before. I'll be picking one or two up for my my upcoming list i think. 

As for the Nightspinner, I love the look of the thing, easily the best looking Eldar tank out there. However without a rules change then it just will be too much of a lame duck to use, which is a shame, maybe ill buy one for pure looks an never to use, much like guardians or vypers. A punisher-esque wep in FA slot with a transport ability would be potentially worth it, but even then I wouldn't be sure.


----------



## elkhantar (Nov 14, 2008)

It's not like they haven't changed FW stuff stats before when introducing stuff to regular 40k (look at the trygon, for example...)

It's way too early to complain. I'm not going to say that GW always does everything right, but without knowing which slot it's going to use, whether it'll be in squadrons or not, the points cost of the thing and the actual final stats of the weapon, it's very very easy to whine. So it's useless vs vehicles due to AP-? I think that it's shooting a mesh of monofilaments to shred and tangle infantry, not vehicles, so it's just as it should be.

If after they publish the final rules it's worthless, then feel free to complain, but for now wait and see, folks; AP- goes well with the fluff, it's up to them now to actually make it useful.


----------



## jams (Sep 19, 2009)

i like the new design for the prism. the new cannon now actually looks like it could focus an energy beam and direct it at a target. that coupled with the fact that it's a full plastic kit gets 2 thumbs up from me

the spinner is very nice too, a marked improvement on the FW variant. 

at the end of the day though, shouldn't we all wait to see some official release pics showing the models for various angles before everyone goes mental over some grainy, half focussed sneaky shots?


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

I think I've worked out what the biggest problem is for me, comparing the new Prism to the old Prism. It's the front mounted weaponry, rather than the old style side mounted weapons. Now, the mounting works quite well for the Night spinners weapons, it looks just right, and well balanced with the two balanced stubby cannons. But use the same mounting for that overly long prism cannon, and it just looks ridiculous, way too flimsly and way too long.

Whats the bet that they designed the cannon earlier, thinking "damn that looks cool", then when they made the new turret, they just stuck it on, even though it doesn't look right at all? 

My last comment was that each part looked well designed and done individually, but it just didn't work for the overall effect. I think the change in mounting is why.


















Side mount just looked better when dealing with long barrelled guns. The short barrelled night spinner looks fine with the front mount though. If I were them, I would have gotten rid of the bit between the first christal and the hull - the flimsy join there - and found a way to put the crystal hard up against the hull (so slot the crystal section into the socket there), so it looked supported, wasn't as flimsly and long, and so it seemed that the gun extended back into the turret, built in, rather than being tacked on as an afterthought.


----------



## Styro-J (Jan 20, 2009)

At least the side mounted guns could aim up and down...


----------



## Inquisitor Malaclypse (Dec 6, 2008)

i'm not very impressed with either, though i might like the new Fire Prism as long as it's not a top have, harder than hell construct to attach to the main hull.

the current one is flipping top heavy, and any one who's put one together knows you need superglue, hope, and a Bonesinger to attache the pewter of the Fire Prism to the plastic part of it.

C+


----------



## Styro-J (Jan 20, 2009)

Good point, I'll rephrase:

At least the Falcon side mounts can aim up and down. If the Fire Prism gun is on it is going to only aim straight ahead (glued thanks to weight). So, no real change there.


----------



## jams (Sep 19, 2009)

Styro-J said:


> Good point, I'll rephrase:
> 
> At least the Falcon side mounts can aim up and down. If the Fire Prism gun is on it is going to only aim straight ahead (glued thanks to weight). So, no real change there.


it depends on the internal mechanism. don't forget, the plastic cannon is going to be a fraction of the weight of the pewter one so theoretically it should be able to elevate and support it's own weight. now, provided there's a good, snug fit between parts and a notched "gear" a-la the falcon, there's no reason why the new prism should only be able to aim straight ahead


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

If the Basilisk can aim up then surely the Fire Prism will be able to as well.


----------



## jams (Sep 19, 2009)

tu_shan82 said:


> If the Basilisk can aim up then surely the Fire Prism will be able to as well.


^ QFT. 

all this vitriol towards a much-needed asthetic prism update is just impotent internet nerd-rage


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

No, it's actually legitimate complaints that what used to be a good and characterful (albeit heavy) model now looks like a bucket of month-old shite.


----------



## jams (Sep 19, 2009)

but everyone is complaining about it after seeing a grainy pic of one angle. at least wait until you've seen the full 360 of it first, then by all means critique away


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Sethis said:


> No, it's actually legitimate complaints that what used to be a good and characterful (albeit heavy) model now looks like a bucket of month-old shite.


Im a dyed in the wool Eldar fan, but the old prism looked like someone had stuck a house brick on a falcon turret, except a house brick weighed less.it went together like shit even if you were lucky enough to get two prism halves that vaguely matched up and getting it to stay on the model without splintering the turret every other game was a miracle. 

the simple fact its plastic and has the night spinner parts included in the kit means this wins hands down.

the new model actually looks like an eldar tank, its long elegant and a nice natural fluid shape to the turret, sorry to say but the old prism looked like a mek boy had some how managed to get his hands on a working eldar falcon chasis and strapped the biggest pointiest rock on it he could find.

You dont have to like the new model, but its a far better solution than the old hybrid.


----------



## Lord Reevan (May 1, 2008)

I thin kthe idea of having the prism part actually mounted in the turret itself instead of that flimsy looking thingy before it is the best idea. it'd have the cannon better proportioned, bulky thin bulky thin just looks shite. bulky bulky thin thin would be much better. And I like the idea of the new cannon... more like eldar to have some advanced technology that fires an energy blast instead of something that turns light into killer rainbows


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

Might be useful and better value but it still looks like horseshit.

Nightspinner looks more promising though but i personally loved the fire prism. Never had the horrors of sticking it together but it looked awesome


----------



## Kiama (Oct 28, 2009)

Wow, uhh...I didnt think it was POSSIBLE for all my excitement on the new plastic models to be flushed down the toilet sooo easily...

I heard of a new plastic prism, i thought would just be a NEW plastic piece. Not an entire back turret redo! Im sorry, but the new Fire prism to me looks ugly as CRAP!~ Im a person that loves things being more simplistic/easy. The old prsim model had a easy/functional use to it. That new one looks like a skimmer with a GIANT FAT guy on the back of it hanging over the view. Seriously, how does a Eldar drive it with that freakn cannon in its face!?! Ugh...

I find it funny, that EVERY OTHER player at my gamers guild likes the new Fire Prism look. Funny, cause as the ONLY Eldar player there, I am the only one that HATES IT with a passion!

http://mittyzx.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/son_i_am_disappoint.gif


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

They just like it because they are just laughing at your despair.

I do notice the trend that a fair few eldar players hate the new prism. Me included.


----------



## Starship Trooper (Dec 2, 2009)

Wow the new FP is way better then the old one! I think this is a great move... and I love the little crystal at the end... hope thats an actuall part and not just for the box art.


----------



## yanlou (Aug 17, 2008)

BoLS has a sneek peak at the new fire prism/nightspinner sprue if anyones interested in looking
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/05/40k-sneak-peek-eldar-night-spinner.html


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

In my humble opinion, Vypers should look like the turret part in the top right corner, with an underslung heavy weapon. THAT would look cool.

The Fire Prism is still ugly.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Agreement there about fire prism ugliness. However IF I can remove the stupid barrel to just have the crystal it might not be so bad.


----------



## yanlou (Aug 17, 2008)

from what i can tell from the sprue pics, it looks like you can either have the crystal barrel gun or just the crystal by itself like the old fireprism


----------



## spudboy (Jun 13, 2008)

Stole a look at the sprues today. It looks like you can make either the Spinner or Prism with what you have. You also now appear to have the parts to make the flared jets you see in the pics. That was all I noticed off hand. The body is the standard Serpent sprue. 

The barrel for the prism is 2-piece, so no, you don't have the option of making a short barrel, ala the old prism.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Sucks cause the cannon ruins the whole tank


----------



## spudboy (Jun 13, 2008)

Stephen_Newman said:


> Sucks cause the cannon ruins the whole tank


At a glance, that wasn't anything a quick snip with a nipper couldn't fix. It looks like you can make a pretty good cut without ruining it.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

I like the look of the barrel on the crystal, could never stand that stupid looking snubby nosed crystal rubbish crap the current stupid prism has


----------



## spudboy (Jun 13, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> I like the look of the barrel on the crystal, could never stand that stupid looking snubby nosed crystal rubbish crap the current stupid prism has


The barrel idea isn't bad, just the length it appears to have in the pics. I need to see the model assembled (which will hopefully be soon) to be certain, but it might not be as long as it appears in the mag pic that is floating around. Either way, it can be trimmed easily.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

spudboy said:


> The barrel idea isn't bad, just the length it appears to have in the pics. I need to see the model assembled (which will hopefully be soon) to be certain, but it might not be as long as it appears in the mag pic that is floating around. Either way, it can be trimmed easily.


no, longer always equals better


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

spudboy said:


> The barrel idea isn't bad, just the length it appears to have in the pics. I need to see the model assembled (which will hopefully be soon) to be certain, but it might not be as long as it appears in the mag pic that is floating around. Either way, it can be trimmed easily.


It isn't even really the length, it's the mounting. the front mounting for that gun just looks silly with the long barrel, where a side mounting would look far better in my opinion. It would make it look far more balanced as a model...

I tend to agree that the turret is well sculpted, and the barrel is well done, but when slapped together like that, it just doesn't work.


----------



## RhYn0 (Oct 29, 2008)

Just seen this over on Bell of lost souls

Warhammer 40k, Fantasy, Wargames & Miniatures News: Bell of Lost Souls: 40K SNEAK PEEK: Eldar Night Spinner Sprue (Pics)



yanlou said:


> BoLS has a sneek peak at the new fire prism/nightspinner sprue if anyones interested in looking
> http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/05/40k-sneak-peek-eldar-night-spinner.html


Well and truly ninja'd on that one lol


----------



## Sgt Pasanius (Jul 24, 2008)

saw the sprues in store today, now i have seen both variants in the flesh i like them.
My friend wants to use the turrets to make some custom vypers because there so sleek


----------



## yanlou (Aug 17, 2008)

RhYn0 said:


> Just seen this over on Bell of lost souls
> 
> Warhammer 40k, Fantasy, Wargames & Miniatures News: Bell of Lost Souls: 40K SNEAK PEEK: Eldar Night Spinner Sprue (Pics)


i thought i should point out that i have already posted this on the page preivously.


yanlou said:


> BoLS has a sneek peak at the new fire prism/nightspinner sprue if anyones interested in looking
> http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2010/05/40k-sneak-peek-eldar-night-spinner.html


----------



## RhYn0 (Oct 29, 2008)

yea just seen, oh well


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Stella Cadente said:


> no, longer always equals better


Another proof that youre a woman:laugh:

...couldnt resist...sorry...


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

LOL + rep for maiden maniac


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

MaidenManiac said:


> Another proof that youre a woman:laugh:
> 
> ...couldnt resist...sorry...


so I have to be a women to enjoy big long weapons able to fire there loads at long distances at great velocity?


----------



## fynn (Sep 19, 2008)

damm wish i had a big long weapon alble to fire its load long distance:biggrin:


----------



## Lord Reevan (May 1, 2008)

why do eldar threads always turn into sexual inuendo threads?? Not complaning but There is a pattern..... And that vyper idea sounds pretty sweet....


----------



## JeroenFM (Nov 25, 2008)

My gut feeling was right - I hate the new Fire Prism, and am very glad with the two old style ones I just started assembling.


----------



## KarlFranz40k (Jan 30, 2009)

Its weird being in the minority who clicks on the link, saw the nightspinner and thought the old one was better, saw the fire prism and loved it. I'm with Stella (feels weird) and BitsandKits, the old fire prism was topheavy, and looked fairly outdated, this new one looks like it is a long range lance cannon, which is good, the clear plastic crystal parts are also quite funky. I'll agree that a side mounted cannon is better than having it bang in the middle, but it is still a far better model than the old one.


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

I'd have preferred the side mount as well, but I think it'll grow on me. I like those clear plastic crystals too. If I'm guessing the dimensions correctly... With a bit of drilling, you could probably mount a tiny battery + LED in the turret and have an an actual GLOW. :mrgreen:


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Shandathe said:


> I'd have preferred the side mount as well, but I think it'll grow on me. I like those clear plastic crystals too. If I'm guessing the dimensions correctly... With a bit of drilling, you could probably mount a tiny battery + LED in the turret and have an an actual GLOW. :mrgreen:


Very cool idea, im also thinking that it will be possible to put some transparent colour on to the inside of the large crystal,maybe like the oil on water paintings we used to do at school.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Lord Reevan said:


> why do eldar threads always turn into sexual inuendo threads?? Not complaning but There is a pattern.....


Eey, the Eldars did create Slaanesh, so its kind of justified, right


----------

