Re: [Epic] Imperial Guard Dragonfly

From: Carl Billen <billenc_at_...>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 15:18:03 +0100

>Alun Gallie wrote:
>> The Flying Brick strikes again. About a month or so ago Chris Pinson and
I
>> posted a set of stats and fluff to the list for a Squat flyer using the
old
>> T'Hawk model. We dubbed this the StormHawk and the fluff was that it was
>> basically an earlier Impy T'Hawk model that was supplied to the Squats in
>> exchange for mining rights.


And Andy Skinner replied :
>I thought that Carl's suggestion was for the Thunderhawk model
>that looks the same as the new one, just smaller, where yours, Alun,
>is the flying castle. At least, the flying castle looks good in
>the Squat army, and I can't see it being named Dragonfly, so I think
>Carl means the other one.

Actually, I 'think' I meant the Flying Brick. When I recently obtained some
miniatures, there were 6 Thunderhawk models with them. They looked exactly
like the picture on the army cards. However, I also had an army card with a
silhouette of the Thunderhawk of the more recent model. Does this mean that
the "Flying Brick" is the THawk Mk1 and that there is a small version (Mk2)
of the current model (Mk3) ? I had the flying castle in mind, and because
it looks like a brick I thought it was not so maneuvrable (hence its
intercept value of 1), and with is missiles (for the Barrage effect) and the
turret which would be nice for track assaulting planes. It was to small to
jam 6 stands in it, so I reduced it to 2, in order to justify an armour
rating of 6+ on such a small model. Furthermore, as the Imperial Guard
would be 'less disciplined' as the marines, it would be logical that they
would use the 'Flying Brick' nickname. Because bricks do not fly elegantly,
I avoided birdlike names like Hawk and Eagle; because of its barrage it
wanted to call it Dragon, but it was too small for such a name. I then
thought of Dragonfly, which sounded nice, but the commanders and it
passengers would always keep calling it 'the Flying Brick'.

Hope you like it ;-)

Carl Billen
billenc_at_...
Received on Mon Jan 26 1998 - 14:18:03 UTC