Armor design and the cardinal Rule

3

Bonus points for people who get the reference.

Now on the topic at hand, I love the armor designs, I love capes and yes I know there should be epic capes in this game, I don't want them all gone. But I would just like to propose a small consideration for one type of armor: assault armor. The one with the jetpack. Which corrupted heretek in disguise thought adding a cape under a jet engine was a good ideea? I mean forget burning up or having the propulsion flames adhere to it and damaging the armor underneath, what happens after a jump if the cape falls over the intakes and gets tangled up in there ... it's just so sily. Even for 40k. The universe where astartes go into battle with no helmets and chainswords ... you won't see them have capes on their assault units. Not even The Dark Angels, Black Templars, Space Wolves or Blood Angels do that.

Just another small aesthetic consideration.

This post was edited 1 year 181 days ago by XDAvenger
Store Page
Share
3 comments
Armor design and the cardinal Rule
Your Thoughts? Please login to place your opinion. Not a member yet? Register here and now!
1 year 181 days ago
i'm kinda having a hard time making an argument to keep the cape, which is a first time for me. 
1 year 181 days ago
Agreed. This is a good suggestion
1 year 180 days ago

NO CAPES!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M68ndaZSKa8


Yes, 40K does tend towards the absurd but putting anything flimsy close to the intakes or exhausts of jet engines is bad.

This comment was edited 1 year 180 days ago by Kalenath