Why are people having conserns over the fact harlequins have no HQ?

[Maxis Lithium]

The fact that this codex exists to shoehorn people in to using formations, or unbound forces is a serious problem for me. I have no interest in this mode of game design, and I simply will not do it. It is money lost for GW.

[SeeDubEE]

I think formations are actually super fluffy for a well-organized and choreographed "dance crew." And if you aren't looking for fluff and want competitiveness, what is not awesome about fleet + run + charge?

[-Tom-]

So use a different model and equip it so it would operate like the Voidweaver.

Open-topped Falcon anyone?

Yeah, probably will at some point. Maybe a vyper, and do an underslung weapon facing out the rear from under the hull instead. But, that's not a 5 second job to do that conversion and make it look good, and 'Harlequinny', so until I get around to that, I will continue to be saddened by the necessity of including the horrible Voidweaver for the vast bulk of the formations.

[deinol]

Yeah, probably will at some point. Maybe a vyper, and do an underslung weapon facing out the rear from under the hull instead. But, that's not a 5 second job to do that conversion and make it look good, and 'Harlequinny', so until I get around to that, I will continue to be saddened by the necessity of including the horrible Voidweaver for the vast bulk of the formations.

Is it the rear weapon you dislike? I'm just building it without the rear gun. I think it looks fine that way.

[-Tom-]

Is it the rear weapon you dislike? I'm just building it without the rear gun. I think it looks fine that way.

That is a large part of it, though I also feel like it, and the transport kit too of course, look a bit too fat/bulky versus a thinner Vyper hull. However, this may just be the angle it is photo'd from and I will reserve judgement on that until I see one built in front of me somewhere.

Love the rest of the stuff though.