Find a flaw. You can't.

>>49949308
>No skulls

>>49949308
>Isn't a Gargantuan Creature

>>49949308
Ah, I fucking hate those tanks.

I have a imperial guard player at my store, he started to field those after noting their effectiveness at my blob army.

He's got three or two of them now.

>>49949308
Flat sides. You have to turn whole tank to move main gun. Main gun cant even change vertical angle. If you go down the hill to fast you start to dig a trench with your cannon.

>>49949308
flank or rear attacks targeting the fuel

>>49949308
>shitty-looking little trailer
>sponsons and a rhomboid WWI hull for muh nostalgia

Awful in every way. You're awful for liking it. KYS.

Can I see the stats/options on it?
I don't play 40k anymore and haven't seen this IRL.

>>49949308
I love the goofy design and the silly details.
The obviously vulnerable fuel tank being pulled on two wheels behind the main tracked vehicule made me kek.

We either have here the product of a very out-of-touch mechpriest or of a very desesperate general.

>>49949457
>Rhomboid
It's actually closer to an irregular pentagon

Its sides have five sides

Not arguing your points, trying to help with geometric identification

>>49949684
I think they are design to be used in a large formation all in front.

>>49949791

Still wouldn't be very usefull except on very flat, hard and even terrain.
On a battlefield full of artillery craters, that fuel tank is just going to jump chaotically behind as it's being pulled by a tank strolling at 30km/h over obstacles.

Even on a salt desert, that fuel tank would still be an explosive liability.
It is however a nice touch that, unlike the hellhound, they put the fuel tank AWAY from the crew.

>>49949967
The only places that i can think of were they could be used effectively is isn't a flat area but rather in a city or tanks like if your station near a baneblade pushing foward with burners.

on the subject of flat area's if you had like 5 line up next to each other with tanks supporting them on the sides to prevent flanking maybe.

but you know bullshit rules that mean units can hit back armor from infront..

File: download.jpg (7KB, 378x133px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 378x133px

>>49949684
Its loosley based on a real tank

File: Crocodile.jpg (96KB, 1204x454px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1204x454px

>>49949967
you are probably right.

>>49950106
well,
the crocodile has
>hull flamethrower
>retains cannon
>can eject the fuel tank, and continue as a gun carrier

>>49950128
>>49950106
Hive crocodileminde

>>49949308

Fuck the haters, I think it is great, has this special W40k aesthetic we love so much. If somebody doesn't like goofy looking rule-of-cool tanks then why the fuck play 40k in the first place?

File: Panzerjager_V_Jagdpanther_Sd_Kfz_173.jpg (86KB, 1104x517px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1104x517px

>>49949308
As with all fixed guns, its less effective when attacking because of limited arc.
That said my GOAT tank (destroyer) has that very same flaw.

>>49951418
Jagdpanther a shit

Especially when it can be penned by a Sherman firefly from the front

File: PANZER RAVE.gif (248KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 480x270px

>inb4 girls und panzer tank jousting webm
>inb4 autistic sperges go on and on about how it's stupid
>inb4 obvious bait post about how girls und panzer is for manchildren
>inb4 everybody falls for the bait anyway

>>49951546
You're being a prime example of that "Man I hate pancakes" comic.

>>49949308
I think you could barely fit a Chimera turret on the crew compartment next to the flamethrower. Put stuff like a cannon, autocannon, lascannon, etc.

>>49949747
You ARE arguing his points

>>49951465
They'll have to spot it first tho

>>49951546
Nobody was even mentioning it until you came along, so yes. Girls und panzer is fucking stupid and for manchildren.

File: -Venus-_the_bulldog_mascot_of_the_destroyer_HMS_VANSITTART,_1941._A3998.jpg (118KB, 800x541px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 800x541px

>>49952222
>Nobody was even mentioning it until you came along, so yes.
He wasn't too late to warn us.

>Girls und panzer is fucking stupid and for manchildren.
Slay thyself, knave.

>>49949308
Nut enuf' dakka.

>>49952222
>quads being wasted on shitbait

(you)

>>49952873
good thing i dont give a fuck about gets or meme magic

>>49952222
Quads confirm Girls und Panzer is shit.

P.S. T-34 is best tonk.

File: 496832[1].jpg (688KB, 3821x2331px) Image search: [Google]

688KB, 3821x2331px

>>49949308
Two flaws, 40k and rule of cool aside.
>Is a flamethrower tank with no means to elevate the main gun (It could work if they had a way to regulate pressure, but then the gun would need to be elevated by default).
You're not gonna torrent anything with that gun.
>Uses piezo and secondary gas burner instead of pyrotechnics to ignite the prometheum.
But the second one is common to every 40k flamer.

The Malcador is pure sex, though.

>>49949381
>Flat sides.

Sloped armor has ceased to be relevant in the modern era unless you've got ridiculously huge sloping, as most modern tank munitions completely ignore it.

>>49951418
If you're firing at 1k+ range then the lack of turret traverse isn't so important. Hence why all the most effective German, and plenty of the top Russian tanks were all turretless.

File: SSPanzerdivision_Das_Reich.jpg (68KB, 800x495px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 800x495px

>>49956938
>tfw the Tiger finally becomes an acceptable design
I knew this day would come

File: warhammer_40k_ork_tinkerer_by_akonstad-d5scts2.jpg (142KB, 900x709px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 900x709px

Not fixed up good and propa

File: _82194214567_.png (77KB, 266x450px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 266x450px

>>49949308
>no skulls
not even trying

>>49955079
To be fair, it's not always fire
Actually it's better when it's not. Chem Malc best Malc

Otherwise though, it has the Torrent rule (I think?), so they must pressurise it a whole lot

>>49956938
Still matters for lasers, theres a shit load of different weapon types in 40k and sloped armour would work on a lot of them.

>>49956938
Sloped armor is still used because it messes with HEAT rounds even with minor sloping. SABOT rounds though...

>>49951714
It doesn't have points though, the vertices of the pentagon are rounded.

>>49949381
Nearly every real tank has flat sides, why do you keep bringing this up?

>>49949328

Fuck me... he's right.

>>49949381
That's a flamethrower tho

>>49958817
It was an acceptable design in the mid 30s and early 40s Anon.

Even with flat sides, its armor was thick enough to withstand almost everything the enemy had.

File: Malcador.jpg (73KB, 800x680px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 800x680px

>>49955079
Why is something so horrible so good-looking?

Flaw: looks sorta gay senpai

>>49955079
>>49963887
I like the tank hunter more than the malcador along with the flamer variant.

File: Minotaur1.png (819KB, 925x563px) Image search: [Google]

819KB, 925x563px

What do you guys think of this creature?

>>49964868
It's going to shift badly to one side every time it fires one of its cannons.

>>49959940
No modern MBT uses HEAT to combat equivalent armor. Composite armor like Cobham or the addition of ERA has neutered HEAT and related it to the anti-light armor/vehicle department.

>>49966317
That's why you fire both at once!

>>49964868

Kawaii~

>>49949437
/thread

>40k
Ah, there it is.
The flaw.

>>49969668

das sexy, they a real thing?

>>49950106
>>49950128

Those were probably designed not to attack enemy lines during a battle, but maybe just to clear the path of trees or jungle fauna (Vietnam) to prevent enemies to hide in dense forests.

>>49949308
>no flaws
>post picture of a bullet magnet

Never seen one of them actually fire, always see them prioritized first turn

>>49972189
>probably designed not to attack enemy lines
>Vietnam
You wot m8?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_Crocodile
Literally excelled in taking out bunkers

>>49964868
Is there anther vehicle that has superior rear armor than the front?