MK Armour in the Current 40k Setting

[house_cawdor]

Hello all!

I have a question about the Space Marines' Armour and how it appears in the current setting (M41).
Do the Space Marines typically have a full set of armour (like a full set of MKIII) or is it mixed and matched with other armour variants? I remember somewhere in the fluff that some armour types can be mixed and are mixed, but how often does that occur? Thanks for the insight!

[Tepogue]

There is no correct answer to this question.

It depends on the chapter and even then there can be variants.

A fresh newly founded chapter, would have uniform armor. Dark Angels one of the founding chapters would have valued pieces of armor passsed down. A crusading SM chapter would have bits and pieces of armor from not being resupplied or infrequently resupplied while on crusade.

[Wolfshade]

A lot depends on the history of the chapter.
Later foundings will only have access to more modern types of armour, whereas older foundings will have access to the original versions. So a later founding will have complete suits of mk7 or 8.

In various sources (Codex BA for example) it states that the oldest armour dates back to before the heresey and are treated as relics and are worn with pride. So warriors do sometimes mix and match as they wear a fallen brother/chapter hero armour to honour them.

So it is a frequently as you would like you can mix and match. For instance, all of my veterans have Mk6 armour (beakies), my honour guards have marks 3,4 and 5 are at least components from them.

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Different chapters have different production capabilities and so forth. Red Scorpions can make their Mk4, for instance.

Not many chapters like/use Mk5, but some do. All of them tend to only have a few copies of Mk8. Mk1 is almost non-existant now. Newer tends to be more common than older, but not always.

Recruits would often receive "mixed" suits since they'd be inheriting a suit of a deceased battle-brother. Even a new chapter would probably have a couple of mixed suits worn by the veterans which raised the chapter.

[house_cawdor]

OK, so a First Founding Chapters' Marines may have either full suits of armour or they may be mixed and matched depending on the circumstances. I am considering doing one of the First Founding Chapters such as Iron Hands or Dark Angels. I appreciate all of the responses.

[Wolfshade]

That's correct.
Though I am sure that you'd be able to mix and match and do what ever you think looks best :D

[OrksOrksOrks]

The fluff says that MK VI onwards are designed to be able to use components from each other, MK V components are often fitted in though, because they are a reminder of the Heresy. Suits older than that are rare relics that you might have to earn the rights to wear, often saved for veterns, the older the Chapter, the more likely they are to have these relics in the armoury, if you're using a newly outfitted chapter like the Minotaurs, they're more likely to have MK VII and VIII than anything old.

[MaltonNecromancer]

There is no correct answer to this question.

There is if you take FFG's "Deathwatch" game as canon.

The full details are in "Rites of Battle"; I'd go into them, but they run to about ten pages of highly detailed fluff. Short version = most armour parts are compatible with all other armours (except Mk 1, which isn't "proper" power armour). Mk 2 and 3 armour are ancient relics of the chapter - only issued to Captains and the like. Mk 3 is an adaption of Mk 2, and was designed for boarding actions, hence heavy front armour, poor stealth. Mk 4 was the "best" armour (most advanced, most efficient, lightest) but isn't really used because not many survived The Heresy. It now goes on high-ranking marines mostly. Mk 5 was the AK-47 equivelant (cheap and effective, but nasty, and distrusted because of superstitious associations with The Heresy), and most marines are now in Mk 7 because it's basically more effective than Mk 6. Mk 8 isn't really in full production, hence mostly issued to sergeants.

A marine will normally be given a suit made up of one mark entirely, but some marines choose to mix and match as they see fit (I like Mk 8 chest pieces for the increased head armour, and Mk 6 heads for the superior sensor array, but sadly the two aren't compatible.)

[Chris*ta]

This question really is one that you can use whatever answer you want.

If you go by the cureent SM Codex pp. 18-9, pretty much no Ultramarine wears a suit completely of one mark at all, and there's a significant amount of the early marks 2-5 available to them.

If we look at the minis, mks 6,7 and 8 are mixed freely by most marines, and some earlier marks are used as well, e.g. mk 3 helmet on the plasma cannon guy in the new Dark Vengeance set.

If you go by some of the earlier fluff, the earlier marks are largely preserved as whole suits and given to prestigious squads/individuals in the Chapter.

The SM Codex notes that the way that various marks are divided up (and even if they are kept as whole suits or used piecemeal) varies from Chapter to Chapter.

TL;DR Do whatever you want to/can afford/think looks cool.

[Cpt Codpiece]

on a further note, that GW has completey disregarded their own fluff (again) only MK VI and VII use interchangable parts. this was first brought up in WD (about 120ish) and was in the RT compendium, under the armour MKs and their uses.

MK VIII however is a strange one, as we only have torsos in plastic. we have never had a et of legs or helmet. only the metal armour of the ages is complete, and the arms would be wrong as they are MK VI/VII, im sure MK VIII has vambraces like the new dark angels, the legs are more slender and have a ball joint on the greaves where they meet thr feet, and also extra armour on the heels (like grey knights in PA and new chaos)

but the way it stands with regard to codex now, anything goes it seems.

i prefer MK IV and VI with MK 5 being a cvlose contender for 3rd (terminator helm FTW)

[Wolfshade]

Do you remember the old metal devastators.
Look at their legs, what mark is that?

[Wolfshade]

Mark 7 apparently:
http://www.solegends.com/citcat9x4/c93476-01.jpg
But look at their ankles, not standard by any stretch

[Cpt Codpiece]

Devastators....... it says MK VII but.......
they were MK VIII legs modified with blasts and the likes. note the ball joints at the ankle.
either that or just weighted greaves just the weights are modified with blast decor etc

[Wolfshade]

I think you're probably right Cpt, extra balast to help with recoil

[Denzark]

I don't think anyone can reliably look at one piece of armour and call it one mark or another. Because of a mix of factors - retcons, designers doing what the hell they like, and canon showing official changes.

Example: MkVI shoulder pads used to be spiked. This was in the WD (129 i believe) with the armour introductions, explained as being due to lack of materials - this was cheap reinforcing.

However current MkVI comes without these spikes.

So I don't think you can look at MkVII devastators and say they have MkVIII legs - could be a chapters own version, after mods, artificer honours, or anything.

The only piece you can reliably call is probably helmet.


Agree that Officers and heroes are more likely to have older marks.

[Chris*ta]

on a further note, that GW has completey disregarded their own fluff (again) only MK VI and VII use interchangable parts. this was first brought up in WD (about 120ish) and was in the RT compendium, under the armour MKs and their uses.

It was WD 136. Useless trivia stuck in memory FTW!

[Chris*ta]

Do you remember the old metal devastators.
Look at their legs, what mark is that?

I always assumed that was just a modified Mk 7 leg, modified in some way to make using shoulder mounted heavy weapons easier.

One of the Devastators on p. 18 in C:SM has legs like that; he's using the modern (non-shoulder mounted) heavy bolter though.

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

on a further note, that GW has completey disregarded their own fluff (again) only MK VI and VII use interchangable parts. this was first brought up in WD (about 120ish) and was in the RT compendium, under the armour MKs and their uses.I'd figure that applies more to the internal components, and even if there's say, some MKII mixed in to MK7, that probably means the internals were replaced with 6/7 components due to damage and degradation over time (but they still desire to preserve as much of the beloved MKII armourplate as possible).

[Cpt Codpiece]

I always assumed that was just a modified Mk 7 leg, modified in some way to make using shoulder mounted heavy weapons easier.

One of the Devastators on p. 18 in C:SM has legs like that; he's using the modern (non-shoulder mounted) heavy bolter though.

if you look two or three marines to that guys right, the other H bolter has MK VIII legs (the ball joint on the ankle)

im not sure the internals of mk II would be compatible at all to mk IV as they are such a big tech jump.

as for mixed mk's prior to mk VI it is said in deliverance lost that any mixed ad hoc suit is considered mk V. as there was no real mk V, the corvus jumped straight to mk VI.

[Chris*ta]

if you look two or three marines to that guys right, the other H bolter has MK VIII legs (the ball joint on the ankle)

im not sure the internals of mk II would be compatible at all to mk IV as they are such a big tech jump.

as for mixed mk's prior to mk VI it is said in deliverance lost that any mixed ad hoc suit is considered mk V. as there was no real mk V, the corvus jumped straight to mk VI.

I see what you mean, but not convinced that's necessarily mk VIII, or just a mk VII variation.

Oh, and the point that the good Reverend was making, is that artificer's would take a piece of mk II armour, gut it of all the internal gubbinz, and just shove the worky bitz from a mk VII suit. Ahh, the job's a good 'un! (Orks can be artificers, right?)

And the article in WD 136/129 (now I'm doubting myself) had a pretty specific description of what mk V was like and when/where/why it was designed. I'd be inclined to believe that this "there's no such thing as a TRUE mk V" is an attempt by later Imperial officials to whitewash the dark history of the Heresy. A bit like the way Stalin shipped all examples of the PPD sub machine gun off to China, so that they couldn't remind people in the 50s and 60s of Stalingrad (where the PPD was designed and built). Even though the USSR retained earlier SMG designs.

[Cpt Codpiece]

I see what you mean, but not convinced that's necessarily mk VIII, or just a mk VII variation.

Oh, and the point that the good Reverend was making, is that artificer's would take a piece of mk II armour, gut it of all the internal gubbinz, and just shove the worky bitz from a mk VII suit. Ahh, the job's a good 'un! (Orks can be artificers, right?)

And the article in WD 136/129 (now I'm doubting myself) had a pretty specific description of what mk V was like and when/where/why it was designed. I'd be inclined to believe that this "there's no such thing as a TRUE mk V" is an attempt by later Imperial officials to whitewash the dark history of the Heresy. A bit like the way Stalin shipped all examples of the PPD sub machine gun off to China, so that they couldn't remind people in the 50s and 60s of Stalingrad (where the PPD was designed and built). Even though the USSR retained earlier SMG designs.

if you look at the mk VIII guy from the armour of the ages he has smooth feet and the ball joint on the ankle, its pretty much a refined mk VII (streamlined power section at belly, high 'bullet catcher' gorget and modified face plate to allow use of gorget)

as for the mk V, the imp fist capt tells corax (he actually asks about mk V) that they were already using mk V, as the ad hoc suits they had fasioned were classed as mk V. since they had additions that were not sanctioned by mars i am guessing.

ill have a flick through the compendium, but im sure even then it says its an ad hoc design.

had a look, mk IV was too awkward and needed specialst gear to fix..... they couldnt do it due to the heresy.
so mk V was the result, cobbled together from the bits they had left from terminators and older suits (mk II and III), with added plating with the bonding studs)

[house_cawdor]

Now what about those Chaos Marines? What the hell is up with their amour? Their plastic kit looks like no MK armour from the Crusade.

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

Now what about those Chaos Marines? What the hell is up with their amour? Their plastic kit looks like no MK armour from the Crusade.I think they're supposed to be mainly Mk5-based, judging by the helmets and occasional chest-cables, kinda weird since it completely lacks the studs the Mk5 is known for. The kneepad-less legs are Mk6-ish, though, and the "flared" gauntlets seem like a Mk2 thing? That kit feels like a missed opportunity, too uniform, not enough callbacks to other old armour-marks. Especially since the Dark Vengeance models make it look like absolute pants :P

[Cpt Codpiece]

the current CSM box was at release and still was at the re pack (with new sprues for chaos powers added), quite bad. i think it is the oldest core kit in the entire 40k range as all the others have been re-cut a few times.

the mk VI legs are probably because the story of the heresy was done when RTB 01 was the main kit, hence the mk VI legs. even kharn uses MK VI despite later being described in mks III & IV yet his helm is clearly a mk VII or one of the funky FW mk IV. the traitors have been said to pillage from dead chapter marines so this may be an explanation as to where some bits are from.

i think when FW get around to the traitors getting 'gifts' (yay FW gal vor'bak) we will see a lot of those modded mk III and IV. bring it on :)

there is only a single piece of mk V in plastic on any kit, the cabled chest pieces :( the heads are basded off terminator helmets, no power armour guys have a plastc TDA head sadly, though the legs of the CSM do have some cable bundles on the thighs. i suppose the skull head on the CSM could be seen as a modded mk V though.