faj3r over at Warseer wrote:I heard, from reliable source, that all finecast are going to be mail-order exclusive (my source gave it as a fact)

Comment was that it's possible, that the're going into plastic with characters - instead of finecast and metal - because it's cheaper and technology of plastic miniatures they have great these days (that I think is my source speculation)

IMHO it is possible - because finecast sales is (as I heard) very low, and almost everyone call it crap - and people are looking for the old metals on ebay, quality of plastic miniatures form Island of Blood for example or Vengeance is remarkable, and going back to metal it would be confess that finecast was a big mistake so it wouldn't be politically correct

75hastings69 wrote:I have HEARD via my sources that finecrap has pretty much been recognised as not fit for purpose, and within the timeframe I gave in that thread it is as Starfarer suggests that GW will go pretty much 100% plastic. They are presenting (or getting together the presentation) that FineCAST was only ever a stop gap, and that plastic is the real future.....

Plastic may well be the future, but not if its all angular CAD sculpted soul-less crap, with increasingly less detail..... that's not the future, I can buy that kind of cartoony crap now from PP!

Plastic is my medium of choice, so I applaud a move to all plastic.

This all plastic rumour shouldn't be attributed to me, I'm just passing on what I've heard.

A week ago, on 18th January:

75hastings69 wrote:It depends, when the inferior product (FineCAST) is sooooooo much cheaper to produce than the superior product (metal because of he price of the raw product) then even if everyone returned their models 10 times (which they don't) they'd STILL make more profit than selling 1 perfect metal cast. I'm not making this up its fact! There is however a long term goal, although its a bit shorter now and should be seen in the next 2 - 3 years if my sources are correct FineCAST is not work in progress it's a live product that is on sale to the public, it was work in progress for the minimum 8 months before public launch that they were meant to be testing it!

Try checking a blister/box for casting flaws, if Finecast gets mail order only

I would cheer, cos I like a lot of the plastic characters, but I suspect this will be another reason to... well, you know what.

To me this sounds like a step in the right direction on the road to the rumoured transition to plastic. Now I've never dealt with Finecast, but from what I've heard plastic is preferable, and what people want.

I have no idea why people consider metal superior. I absolutely HATE metal miniatures. I convert so many models and metal is a major pita to model, paint keeps going off, it doesn't look as detailed as Finecast does etc.

Finecast is INCREDIBLY overpriced but seriously, metal sucks.

Plastic > Resin > Metal

Plastic characters are great, but who would trust ordering finecast without seeing it first? I guess GW mailorder probably have a good return policy, but still...

(maybe it's not all that unlike ordering from Forgeworld, but with a subpar material)

 Sigvatr wrote:
I have no idea why people consider metal superior.

Only 50% of this model's blade survive even transport to the shop, would have been no problem with metal:

 Sigvatr wrote:
I have no idea why people consider metal superior. I absolutely HATE metal miniatures. I convert so many models and metal is a major pita to model, paint keeps going off, it doesn't look as detailed as Finecast does etc.

Finecast is INCREDIBLY overpriced but seriously, metal sucks.

Plastic > Resin > Metal

This. Very much this.

I'm even typing this with a sore hand from sawing through the arm of a certain metal warrior priest for a simple conversion... something that would've been far less painful with plastic. Admittedly I've never actually had to deal with FailCast, so my experience is relegated to some old WW2 minis I own.

That being said if the price of the new PLASTIC Chaos Lord is any indication, then there won't be a whole lot of difference in terms of what we're paying for them.

 Flashman wrote:
Well I would cheer, cos I like a lot of the plastic characters, but I suspect this will be another reasons to... well, you know what.

We have had to 'temporarily' increase the price of our metal miniatures due to the 'tin crisis'. - Tom Kirby

Our plastic miniatures now meet the same level of quality as our metal miniatures and we will be bringing their price 'into line' with that range to reflect their status as 'premier kits'. - Tom Kirby

We are pleased to release finecast miniatures, these are of 'superior quality' and protect us from the 'fluctuating cost of tin', unfortunately due to the 'careful mixing process', prices must increase. - Tom Kirby

Our customer base is proven to withstand a great degree of 'price elasticity'. - Tom Kirby


The transfer from the temporary stepping stone of finecast to an entirely plastic range will be very costly to our business but ultimately reduce the tricky business of dealing with resin. However due to the requirements of additional plastic moulding, there will be a price readjustment. - Tom Kirby of the futurrrreeeee....





Automatically Appended Next Post:


You want to take a guess at how many of this new model will be cast correctly, then take a guess at how long this sword will last:
a)packaging
b)transport to retail
c)opening
d)assembly/painting
c)transporting to games
e)tabletop use
f)potential drop

I believe it when I see it.

 Sigvatr wrote:


Plastic > Resin > Metal

Not detailed plastic > GW plastic > plastic in general ?

Am all for 100% plastic if the kits stay compatible.

With how detailed and functional the new plastics are, this would be a great move. However, I don't believe that GW would give up on finecast just yet.

Assuming you got a decent quality model, Finecast was ok for miniatures with thick robust pieces. However, any piece that was thin (swords, staffs etc) was usually beyond saving.

So Finecast Fire Dragons were pretty good, whereas Finecast Howling Banshees were utter

Uh guys, keep in mind transition to plastic means FEWER MODELS.

In the days of metal we had dozens of Chaos champs to choose from, now there is one plastic champ. A rather nice one but we're not exactly spoiled for choice.

And so far all the plastic characters have pretty much been monopose with few or no options. Yeah converting is easy, if you have a deep bitz box.

I can't say I'll miss Finecast since I never once bought a FC model but I will miss having lots of models to choose from.

Thank goodness for the explosion of 3rd party companies.

I am the only one who likes metal minis :( ?

The sooner, the better. There really is no excuse for this half-assed semi-resin they call Finecast when tiny companies liky Wyrd can go all plastic.

So all plastic? Sounds good to me... This was the original plan anyways. Maybe they should have stuck it out with metals until they had gone all plastic.

 devilution wrote:
I am the only one who likes metal minis :( ?

No, any serious collector will prefer metal

Plastic good for converting and multipart armies etc, resin good for nothing and metal the best piece you can have in your collections displays, all undercuts in there, nice textures and details besides metal weight gives soul to your minis.

 NAVARRO wrote:

 devilution wrote:
I am the only one who likes metal minis :( ?

No, any serious collector will prefer metal

Plastic good for converting and multipart armies etc, resin good for nothing and metal the best piece you can have in your collections displays, all undercuts in there, nice textures and details besides metal weight gives soul to your minis.

Resin is good for, you know, actually being able to stick your fething models together...

Metal is fine for single piece models. It's not so good for multi-part characters, and is absolutely terrible for big, multi-part, heavy monsters.

Take a look at the Mangler Squigs. You complain because they are Finecast, and so can sag if you aren't careful with them and are leaving them next to a radiator.

Now imagine keeping the fething thing in one piece if it was made of metal.

ARGH.

Also, resin allows for finer detail than metal, as there is less shrinkage from cooling and setting.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Plastic > Resin/Metal > Wood > Papier mache > Clay > Frozen mist > Unicorn horn > ... > ... > Finecast

Fixed that for you...

I tend to think resin as being better for garage kits, small runs and display pieces. Metal has the advantage, generally, of structural strength and being able to handle undercuts better than plastic. Your average resin or metal model is going to be a better cast than a Finecast figure.

Also, if your paint is chipping off your metal models, there may be a problem with either your painting method or your approach to handling your models. If you're washing, undercoating and varnishing your metal models, and not bouncing them off the walls, you shouldn't get chips in your paintwork...

 devilution wrote:
I am the only one who likes metal minis :( ?

No, you're not. I can clearly see a day when multi-part plastics become the premium product and the single sprue, mono-pose plastics become the norm. Want 10 tactical marines? $50 will buy you a box with one sprue and all the details molded on for you convenience. The future is coming. Be careful what you wish for, people...

 Squigsquasher wrote:


Resin is good for, you know, actually being able to stick your fething models together...

.

I own thousands of minis in all kinds of materials, even plasresins from obscure french companies... if you cant stick metal minis well... its not a material issue and rather just your lack of expertise

BTW manglers are bad in all materials because the miniature designer forgot to introduce the design part on the model and created something totally unfriendly for wargaming! Hummm thinking on all materials I think the metal would get away better with those joints if you hollow the bodies to a maximum. But still in all material you will have to heavy pin. Horrible design choices there.

 NAVARRO wrote:
if you cant stick metal minis well... its not a material issue and rather just your lack of expertise

Sweeping statements ahoy!

3 words: Metal Hive Tyrant.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Plastic > Resin/Metal > Wood > Papier mache > Clay > Frozen mist > Unicorn horn > ... > ... > Finecast

Fixed that for you...

I tend to think resin as being better for garage kits, small runs and display pieces. Metal has the advantage, generally, of structural strength and being able to handle undercuts better than plastic. Your average resin or metal model is going to be a better cast than a Finecast figure.

Also, if your paint is chipping off your metal models, there may be a problem with either your painting method or your approach to handling your models. If you're washing, undercoating and varnishing your metal models, and not bouncing them off the walls, you shouldn't get chips in your paintwork...

I started gaming almost 20 years ago, when metal was the rule. I built hundreds of Battletech mechs and other metal minis. I never washed any of them, simply primed then painted. I never had a problem with paint flaking off.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
if you cant stick metal minis well... its not a material issue and rather just your lack of expertise

Sweeping statements ahoy!

3 words: Metal Hive Tyrant.

Hint: plastic glue does not work there

Seriously though I have 2 decade metals still glued and they survived all kinds of abuse, even moving from one country to another with no foams or protective stuff... so yes try to find out a good way to assemble metal minis ( theres probably plenty online).

@devilution - absolutely not!

But Kid_Kyoto is also correct - which is why I miss the real metals....back when their were lots of different models for each type. That was why you needed such a big catalog just to show stuff. 30 different models for a type was not unusual (head swaps, items swaps and real different poses).

 Sigvatr wrote:
I have no idea why people consider metal superior. I absolutely HATE metal miniatures. I convert so many models and metal is a major pita to model, paint keeps going off, it doesn't look as detailed as Finecast does etc.

Finecast is INCREDIBLY overpriced but seriously, metal sucks.

Plastic > Resin > Metal

Many consider metal superior because it doesn't come full of holes, miscasts, and brittle bits.

 helium42 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
I have no idea why people consider metal superior. I absolutely HATE metal miniatures. I convert so many models and metal is a major pita to model, paint keeps going off, it doesn't look as detailed as Finecast does etc.

Finecast is INCREDIBLY overpriced but seriously, metal sucks.

Plastic > Resin > Metal

Many consider metal superior because it doesn't come full of holes, miscasts, and brittle bits.

Speaking in absolutes is detrimental to having a lively conversation. Trust me on this.

Pewter did still have issues, the issues were just fewer and less common. You still had mould slips, broken bits, shrinkage, and other issues. You just did not see them as often, and to a lesser extent you did not have people actively looking for the faults.
If you had a bad metal model you didn't go post about it on Dakka, you called up GW or went to your LGS and had them replace it for you.

If crapcast is indeed on the way out ( one can only hope) and GW wants to limit the cost of new toolings for plastic characters, I hope they will go for multipart models that allow for building / posing multiple specifis special characters, as well as the unnamed squad leaders heroes priests and wat not...

Well, I can dream , can't I.....

PS, A certain moder Producer did not claim to have the most superior and flawless models with pewter... they did with a (IMHO) inferior plastic/resin mix... when you create high expectations and fail to deliver... you do the math

I am amazed, and to be honest a little bit surprised, by the number of uninformed comments here regarding the advantages of metal, resin and plastic over each other.

Kid Kyoto already mentioned numbers of sculpts, and of course that is a big issue, but put simply despite the advances in plastic sculpting method (of which there have been many) plastic can simply not contain the detail that resin or metal potentially offer to the sculptor. Ease of construction yes, ease of conversion yes, but your character models are going to be looking more than a little 'plain jane' in the future if this turns out to be true. And this is before we start talking about undercuts, and the other limits placed on the sculptor when using plastic. Each medium offers something, and they complement each other.

So that's the big issue for me - GW have already fallen behind the likes of Corvus Belli, Studio McVey and some of the other stuff hitting the market right now, in terms of complex designs and sculpting. If this change is taking place then it's like they are not even trying to run at the same pace and you have to think that it is being done entirely for financial reasons - and once again there is absolutely no regard for the collector, especially the miniature enthusiast who wants something of a higher quality.

Hastings described the current bunch of giant Tomix toys, labelled as wargaming miniatures, as 'CAD-sculpted soulless crap'. Yes having a strong range of plastics is really important, and will no doubt make some people happy. But, for the true painting enthusiasts and those who want highly detailed miniatures on occasion, this will surely be the straw that breaks the camels back and the company's reputation will have been done for by proving that they have been unable to produce a better quality resin that is up to the task.

Who would have thought, all those years ago, that it would come to this. If it's true, I'm flabbergasted. Really.

They'd have been better off with a 50% price rise on metals to cover the material costs... that's pretty much what we've ended up with with finecast anyway, only the product is far worse.

Why would metal make a difference if in the number of sculpts? Seen the IG psykers? They were metal...

Its the company and not the material.
Compatible multi-part plastics are superior to toyish one pose sculpts of any material.

Maybe this is a software problem, or precisely , the politics of a company who prefers to copy a design and recycle it endlessly instead of several sculpts ? Not by limits of the software, just the temptation to choose the easy path and copy and paste and add a few details and save money.
So rather the advantage of software misused.

I'm all for plastic, but I'm not all for this "everything only goes on the model one way" thing GW tend to do with bigger plastics like the Vargheists and the Ogre plastics, and even the Orc Boar Boyz. It makes everything ridiculously difficult to model without sculpting muscle definition back in, but it's either that or have a second set of miniatures in exactly the same pose as the first box you bought.

Maybe I've just been extremely lucky, but I haven't needed to return any finecast I've bought. Sure there has been some minor defects on a couple of models, but these were always in impossible-to-see locations such as the inside edge of an arm or the inside of a backpack that glues to the model. Even the 2nd-hand finecast I've picked up from ebay was all good.

I also vastly prefer it over metal because not only is it easier to convert (like putting lash whips on my Tyrant Guard), but it doesn't have the balance issues some sculpts do. My metal Hive Guard and Zoanthropes were always getting chipped by falling over on uneven terrain. The finecast ones don't have this problem at all.

Honestly I would hate to see this change, if only because of the inevitable price increase that will accompany it.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Flashman wrote:
Well I would cheer, cos I like a lot of the plastic characters, but I suspect this will be another reasons to... well, you know what.

Automatically Appended Next Post:


You want to take a guess at how many of this new model will be cast correctly, then take a guess at how long this sword will last:
a)packaging
b)transport to retail
c)opening
d)assembly/painting
c)transporting to games
e)tabletop use
f)potential drop

This is EXACTLY what I was thinking when I saw this exact same pic. That Chaost Star in the middle of the blade is kinda cool looking, but is a terrible idea, from a design point of view. Even in metal or plastic, the potential for breaking is really high. Poor decision.

As for moving away from Finecast, I support it if it means more of the great plastic characters. The CSM Aspiring Champ is awesome, though $20 for a single mini is kind of steep.

-C6

 Pacific wrote:
...put simply despite the advances in plastic sculpting method (of which there have been many) plastic can simply not contain the detail that resin or metal potentially offer to the sculptor. Ease of construction yes, ease of conversion yes, but your character models are going to be looking more than a little 'plain jane' in the future if this turns out to be true. And this is before we start talking about undercuts, and the other limits placed on the sculptor when using plastic. Each medium offers something, and they complement each other.

I think your statement needs some qualifiers.

I started with miniatures a little over 20 years ago. Yes, I have metal models (battletech) from that time which are still in one piece. Yes, the edges were (and still are) sharp on those models. Yes, I also have plenty of metal models that have simply come apart from use. It may be a difference between those actively used versus those that have sat on shelves or in drawers.

That said, I have certainly purchased a fair number of metal GW models (hive tyrant for example) over the past 3 or 4 years. Not one of those had what I would classify as a higher level of detail than the DE plastics that came out 2 years ago. In many cases the GW metal models have had serious issues with fitting that required hard labor to try and resolve. Filing, pinning and more being some of my least favorite activities. Heck, some of the designs have such serious inherent flaws that they should never have been produced at all: Zoanthropes for example: very top heavy.

Bear in mind that I didn't have these types of fitting and drilling issues with the older Ral Partha miniatures. Even the "not plastic" / metal hybrid models simply fit.

So claims stating "metal is better!" is put to the test based on models available for purchase today. In today's market plastics are of a much higher quality than both resin and metal models currently being sold. Very very few places appear to be taking the time to do metal right; GW wasn't certainly not one of them. Nor did GW bother to do finecast correctly either. Quite frankly, FW has been around long enough that resin mixtures and production should have been a very well known and quantifiable property. With how finecast was done it sure seems like management didn't bother bringing anyone from that group in to help drive things.

GW then has only two options available to them:
1. Continue producing finecast and deal with the inevitable replacement costs; or,
2. Drop finecast, move to plastics and attempt to justify $40 for an independent character.

Given GW's history, they'll change materials and increase costs whether or not an increase is even remotely justified.

 1hadhq wrote:
Why would metal make a difference if in the number of sculpts? Seen the IG psykers? They were metal...

Its the company and not the material.
Compatible multi-part plastics are superior to toyish one pose sculpts of any material.

Maybe this is a software problem, or precisely , the politics of a company who prefers to copy a design and recycle it endlessly instead of several sculpts ? Not by limits of the software, just the temptation to choose the easy path and copy and paste and add a few details and save money.
So rather the advantage of software misused.

There's also the matter of the mold. A plastic mold is a very large (usually 40-80cm or bigger in each dimension), very heavy, very big thing weighing hundreds of pounds that generally has to be moved by overhead crane from storage, to the injection machine, and then moved by overhead crane back out again. On the low end they cost about 5 figures usually, sometimes only perhaps 4 figures for very small tings, for a kit like a tank or a squad, you're looking at a 6 figure layout quite often and several months of production.

The payout comes from being able to use that mold for years or decades on end to produce potentially millions or tens of millions of plastic thingies.

So, with plastic, you're likely to see fewer poses/options/etc because the company has a huge financial incentive to minimize the number of molds they need to make and instead to sell huge numbers of those molds.


When it comes to Resin or Metal, the molds themselves cost much less to make and can be produced much quicker but have to be replaced/fixed more often, meaning there's a whole lot more room, incentive to make lots of different types of miniatures.




Honestly, to be fair, I've never had a problem with Finecast in and of itself, I like the idea of resin mini's as there's a lot of advantages to them (especially as some simple hot water and bending allow for tons of minor conversion/fixing/etc potential). That said, I certainly can understand the draw to metal in some circumstances. It's always nice to have a big, heavy impressive commander model Fincecast's problem has been that it's had awful quality control and for some reason however they decided to manufacture them they needed 9 bajillion gates on every model in the *worst* places. I consider it a failing of execution rather than concept.

That said, I also don't think they should have gone with it on everything. Metal works best for the tiny models with fiddly bits, those should have been kept metal. Resin works on the big guys where metal is too heavy and people like to do lots of conversion stuff on them.

The problem is that if plastic replaces Finecast, we will see even higher prices. Look at the new chaos Lord in the Advanced orders. Single monopose mini, for $25. Completely ludicrous. That's more than (most) Finecast figures that are like him in size, and everyone seems to agree that those prices are already too high!

Belial is "only" $22.50, and is a Terminator-size figure on a 40mm base.

clively wrote:


So claims stating "metal is better!" is put to the test based on models available for purchase today. In today's market plastics are of a much higher quality than both resin and metal models currently being sold. Very very few places appear to be taking the time to do metal right; GW wasn't certainly not one of them. Nor did GW bother to do finecast correctly either. Quite frankly, FW has been around long enough that resin mixtures and production should have been a very well known and quantifiable property. With how finecast was done it sure seems like management didn't bother bringing anyone from that group in to help drive things.

Given GW's history, they'll change materials and increase costs whether or not an increase is even remotely justified.

That might well be the case with GW, but other manufacturers are consistently putting stuff out that trumps anything possible when produced in plastic. I would say that probably a good 75% of the Infinity releases would not be possible in plastic, or at least not in their current form and without sacrificing the level of detail that has lead to them having such a high reputation within the industry.

This is just picking one model from that range. Nothing in plastic comes even close to that level of detail (and yes this is 28-30mm)


You could equally say the same with some of the Malifaux stuff, some of the miniatures from the Kingdom Death Kickstarter, or any number of others currently producing (Dark Age, Freebooters Fate, McVey etc.) - most of these miniature lines are already cheaper than the charge put forward by GW for its character models. GW have been protected from the competition, to an extent, by the lack of consumer knowledge in the past, and the selling power of those big power-armoured shoulder pads. With the changing market and a greater saturation of rival miniature companies (with more exposure than ever) we'll see how far those two aforementioned selling points are able to stretch.

clively wrote:


In today's market plastics are of a much higher quality than both resin and metal models currently being sold. Very very few places appear to be taking the time to do metal right;

I don't know what places you shop but the big names do do metals in hight quality, Hasslefree, Infinity, Freebooter just to name you 3 of the best, for a reason Griffin moulds ( the best metal caster) is always booked non stop...

As for plastic today being superior to metals sorry man but you are clueless of plastic limitations and metal capacities ( which is strange for a seasoned collector like you)... I could try to debate this with you but that sentence reveals such lack of observation that I don't know where to even start.

Here's one example... Old minis, forget the design... look at the details specially faces and eyes... okish right? Nope! amazing since these are 15mm... good luck casting HALF those details in plastic.

Whatever you may think, plastic will always be the material of preference for the vast majority of gamers. And as far as detail goes, GW and Dreamforge are putting out stuff easily as detailed. On top of that, Infinity figures actually lack a lot of crisp detail. This is generally compensated for by great painters.

Single most important reason for me to stick to metal is: stripping

Metal is unsurpassed in that respect. Dump it in thinner, clean and it's new.

Plastic and resin just have to be handled so tenderly.

 Scottywan82 wrote:
Whatever you may think, plastic will always be the material of preference for the vast majority of gamers. And as far as detail goes, GW and Dreamforge are putting out stuff easily as detailed. On top of that, Infinity figures actually lack a lot of crisp detail. This is generally compensated for by great painters.

I'm tempted to post some kind of 'Wat' or 'not sure if serious' internet meme here...

Plus, an awful lot of Infinity models are just...well...generic. Nice models don't get me wrong...but they're rather bland.

Also, Hasslefree...yeah. Hardly a shining beacon of quality. If it weren't for their nude female sculpts they probably would have sunk by now.

 Pacific wrote:

 Scottywan82 wrote:
Whatever you may think, plastic will always be the material of preference for the vast majority of gamers. And as far as detail goes, GW and Dreamforge are putting out stuff easily as detailed. On top of that, Infinity figures actually lack a lot of crisp detail. This is generally compensated for by great painters.

I'm tempted to post some kind of 'Wat' or 'not sure if serious' internet meme here...

100%. I've been gaming for nearly 20 years and all I ever buy now is plastic. Metal is crap.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Plus, an awful lot of Infinity models are just...well...generic. Nice models don't get me wrong...but they're rather bland.

Also, Hasslefree...yeah. Hardly a shining beacon of quality. If it weren't for their nude female sculpts they probably would have sunk by now.

Again... 'Wat'... what the feth is going on here.... ?! Someone .. anyone, please help me! Have I slipped in to some kind of parallel universe where black is white, Hasslefree poor quality and Infinity models are bland?!

 Squigsquasher wrote:


Also, Hasslefree...yeah. Hardly a shining beacon of quality. If it weren't for their nude female sculpts they probably would have sunk by now.

Brilliant... You have no idea what and to who Kev sculpts do you?
Don't want to sound arrogant but blimey it gets hard to debate with such lack of knowledge.

Single most important reason for me to stick to metal is: stripping

Metal is unsurpassed in that respect. Dump it in thinner, clean and it's new.

Plastic and resin just have to be handled so tenderly.

That's not true for plastic. I use Simple Green to clean my minis. The time it takes for it to strip metal and plastic miniatures alike is exactly the same, with the same level of results. It doesn;t take effect instantly like thinner, or something, but I can afford to be patient for the 2-3 days it takes.

Finecast is another story entirely. As far as I've heard, even Simple Green will destroy a model you are trying to strip.

Hardly. Hasslefree miniatures are pathetic. Like 1980s GW quality.

Likely because they are the same material.

@Pacific, Just look at the example you posted. It's rather generic Sci-Fi. No real flavour. Just a Crysis 3 reject. Most of the Infinity models seem to sell on (admittedly very nicely sculpted) hexagons.

That's why I like 40K, and whilst I don't like many of their scuplts I do like the Warmahordes aesthetic. They both have real flavour and character.

Infinity...just doesn't.

And as for hasslefree, just look at some of their stock photos. Horrible sculpting. Blobby, rounded edges, proportions that make the worst GW model look like a Michelangelo work...Granted they have got better, but their main selling point is cheesecake.

 Pacific wrote:
Again... 'Wat'... what the feth is going on here.... ?! Someone .. anyone, please help me! Have I slipped in to some kind of parallel universe where black is white, Hasslefree poor quality and Infinity models are bland?!

Have you counted the number of skulls on the entire range of Infinity figures? They're fewer than there are on Throgg alone! If that's not proof enough of their blandness and lack of detail, I don't know what is!

Really? I would argue with that. I have some of their Grymn space-dwarves, and the detail is just as good as any other metal model I might buy today. Unfortunately, they are just too small for GW's "28mm" scale.

 -DE- wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Again... 'Wat'... what the feth is going on here.... ?! Someone .. anyone, please help me! Have I slipped in to some kind of parallel universe where black is white, Hasslefree poor quality and Infinity models are bland?!

Have you counted the number of skulls on the entire range of Infinity figures? They're fewer than there are on Throgg alone! If that's not proof enough of their blandness and lack of detail, I don't know what is!

You have forgotten the most important rule of design.

There is NO SUCH THING as too many skulls.

Also, for everyone's whining about "too any skulls!" a great deal of the conversions I've seen on Dakka actually add MORE skulls.

 Scottywan82 wrote:

 Pacific wrote:

 Scottywan82 wrote:
Whatever you may think, plastic will always be the material of preference for the vast majority of gamers. And as far as detail goes, GW and Dreamforge are putting out stuff easily as detailed. On top of that, Infinity figures actually lack a lot of crisp detail. This is generally compensated for by great painters.

I'm tempted to post some kind of 'Wat' or 'not sure if serious' internet meme here...

100%. I've been gaming for nearly 20 years and all I ever buy now is plastic. Metal is crap.

OK, as long as you realise that, regarding detail and sculpting methods possible with plastic when compared to metal (as posted by sculptors, on this very forum on occasion), yours is not the common consensus.

Every GW customer has entire boxes of leftover skull bits, what do you suppose they should do with them? Donate to the poor?

 NAVARRO wrote:

 devilution wrote:
I am the only one who likes metal minis :( ?

No, any serious collector will prefer metal

Plastic good for converting and multipart armies etc, resin good for nothing and metal the best piece you can have in your collections displays, all undercuts in there, nice textures and details besides metal weight gives soul to your minis.

Quoted for truth!

Plus metal is ready to go. Once I started my all metal Tallarn army and realized I could just pop them out of blisters and go I fell back in love with metal.

Now if we could just get lead back.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
@Pacific, Just look at the example you posted. It's rather generic Sci-Fi. No real flavour. Just a Crysis 3 reject. Most of the Infinity models seem to sell on (admittedly very nicely sculpted) hexagons.

That's why I like 40K, and whilst I don't like many of their scuplts I do like the Warmahordes aesthetic. They both have real flavour and character.

Infinity...just doesn't.

Methinks you're not really looking at much of the Infinity line then. If you're only looking at the Yu-Jing, Ariadna and Pan-Oceania basic troopers, yeah, sure, they're relatively generic anime style models. Their more elite units have a lot of character however and if you've seen the alien Combined Army or Nomad lines at all you'd have a completely different impression.

 1hadhq wrote:
Why would metal make a difference if in the number of sculpts? Seen the IG psykers? They were metal...

Its the company and not the material.
Compatible multi-part plastics are superior to toyish one pose sculpts of any material.

Metal molds are relatively easy to make, people can even make them in a garage. But plastic require expensive steel molds.

You're right though there had been a huge change in GW's culture they just produce fewer sculpts these days. I look at some of the Necromunda guys I've been collecting recently and want to weep. A gang with 10 or more scultps! Sure maybe they worked off of 4 or 5 models and modified them but still...

These days we get stuff like the 3 psykers or 3 Ordo Malleus inquisitors who are all CLEARLY the same figure with minor changes in details.

Then I look at Reaper who seem to put out more original sculpts per month than GW and fall in love with a new company.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AegisGrimm wrote:


Finecast is another story entirely. As far as I've heard, even Simple Green will destroy a model you are trying to strip.

Interesting detail if true.

I wonder if it might not be deliberate to bring an end to the secondary market.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
@Pacific, Just look at the example you posted. It's rather generic Sci-Fi. No real flavour. Just a Crysis 3 reject. Most of the Infinity models seem to sell on (admittedly very nicely sculpted) hexagons.

That's why I like 40K, and whilst I don't like many of their scuplts I do like the Warmahordes aesthetic. They both have real flavour and character.

Infinity...just doesn't.

Methinks you're not really looking at much of the Infinity line then. If you're only looking at the Yu-Jing, Ariadna and Pan-Oceania basic troopers, yeah, sure, they're relatively generic anime style models. Their more elite units have a lot of character however and if you've seen the alien Combined Army or Nomad lines at all you'd have a completely different impression.

Maybe. I dunno. They just, simply put, aren't my cup of tea. I don't hate them, although I do hate it when a 40K thread is hijacked by some asshat screaming "play Infinity instead!" which has admittedly coloured my perception of them. I will admit they are superbly sculpted though.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
@Pacific, Just look at the example you posted. It's rather generic Sci-Fi. No real flavour. Just a Crysis 3 reject. Most of the Infinity models seem to sell on (admittedly very nicely sculpted) hexagons.

That's why I like 40K, and whilst I don't like many of their scuplts I do like the Warmahordes aesthetic. They both have real flavour and character.

Infinity...just doesn't.

Methinks you're not really looking at much of the Infinity line then. If you're only looking at the Yu-Jing, Ariadna and Pan-Oceania basic troopers, yeah, sure, they're relatively generic anime style models. Their more elite units have a lot of character however and if you've seen the alien Combined Army or Nomad lines at all you'd have a completely different impression.

Maybe. I dunno. They just, simply put, aren't my cup of tea. I don't hate them, although I do hate it when a 40K thread is hijacked by some asshat screaming "play Infinity instead!" which has admittedly coloured my perception of them. I will admit they are superbly sculpted though.

Always a good reason to bad mouth the quality of a model then!

While you may not like the aesthetic direction of Infinity, you can't deny the level of detail Corvus Belli squeeze into their 28mm models, nor that doing so in plastic just isn't possible becaue of plastics giant mold limitation (undercuts).

I wasn't intentionally bad mouthing them. I am sorry if I did come across as a bit harsh.

Gah, I need to get better at wording my speech...

That I could understand, and that's fine, just wanted to get out that they do have some really great characterful stuff in many of the factions if the sci-fi/anime soldier thing of the two most common factions isn't doing it, particularly the more outlandinsh factions like Nomads and the Combined Army

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:


Now if we could just get lead back.

Now that would be something!

BTW I do wonder about the toxicity levels of finecast... not that I'm worried but its fun to know if these models aimed for kids are actually safe.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
@Pacific, Just look at the example you posted. It's rather generic Sci-Fi. No real flavour. Just a Crysis 3 reject. Most of the Infinity models seem to sell on (admittedly very nicely sculpted) hexagons.

That's why I like 40K, and whilst I don't like many of their scuplts I do like the Warmahordes aesthetic. They both have real flavour and character.

Infinity...just doesn't.

Methinks you're not really looking at much of the Infinity line then. If you're only looking at the Yu-Jing, Ariadna and Pan-Oceania basic troopers, yeah, sure, they're relatively generic anime style models. Their more elite units have a lot of character however and if you've seen the alien Combined Army or Nomad lines at all you'd have a completely different impression.

Except out of the three factions you've listed, only Yu-Jing and Pan-Oceania have "relatively generic anime style models" for their line troopers. Unless I've missed something about Ariadna's basic troopers (the Metros, Line Kazaks, and Caledonian Volunteers) being heavily anime inspired?
Nomads are a mixed bag, Bakunin tends to have the more anime flair while Corregidor has primarily the more "tacticool" styled models. The notable exception is the absolutely garbage and unfitting Wildcat that was released this month.
Combined Army has the same mixed bag, with the Shasvastii being more grounded and realistic while the Morat are very exaggerated in an anime bad guy style.
The Tohaa are, so far, free of anime stylized models or silliness.
Haqqislam is relatively free of such as well.
ALEPH is a bit of a weird one, in that you have a mixture happening as the range is evolving. You have a lot of models having the anime exaggerations and stylizations (the Posthuman Proxy boxed set, Naga Sniper, a lot of the "posed" models like the Dasyu with Combi Rifle doing the one handstand) but you also have a notable attempt to make things fit within the overall visual aesthetic like the Myrmidons being done in such a way that they actually look "generic sci fi".

 Squigsquasher wrote:

Maybe. I dunno. They just, simply put, aren't my cup of tea. I don't hate them, although I do hate it when a 40K thread is hijacked by some asshat screaming "play Infinity instead!" which has admittedly coloured my perception of them. I will admit they are superbly sculpted though.

My emphasis in bold, yes that's the point I was trying to make.

But ultimately perhaps it's a mistake to bring Infinity into this, or any other manufacturer for that matter - ultimately there are a number of superb sculpts, within GW's own range, that would simply not be possible in plastic. That's something that is going to forever lost if this rumour holds to be true.

They should just go back to metal. People need to toughen up and learn to work with it. The new plastic stuff looks terrible.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AegisGrimm wrote:


Finecast is another story entirely. As far as I've heard, even Simple Green will destroy a model you are trying to strip.

Interesting detail if true.

I wonder if it might not be deliberate to bring an end to the secondary market.

Not true - I stripped my Ogre Kingdoms Firebelly in Simple Green and it was just fine (I did use a shorter than normal dip though, just to be on the safe side).

 Squigsquasher wrote:
3 words: Metal Hive Tyrant.

I have 3 (6 if you count 3 2nd Ed Hive Tyrants). Never had an issue with them.

 Pacific wrote:
plastic can simply not contain the detail that resin or metal potentially offer to the sculptor. Ease of construction yes, ease of conversion yes, but your character models are going to be looking more than a little 'plain jane' in the future if this turns out to be true

So plain Jane. Needs Finecast (TM).

I'm pretty sure that I can very easily make a counts-as Belial out of the Command Squad sprues that is not only as visually interesting as the Finecast one, but probably with just as many details- and in a physically tougher medium, as well.

Also, some small concessions to undercutting, the Space Hulk Terminators are as crisply detailed as any metal model. In fact, several of them, like Sergeant Lorenzo, probably more so. The trick is just having more separate pieces, that all come together to add layering.

*Not my paintjob- grabbed off Google

 Radiation wrote:
They should just go back to metal. People need to toughen up and learn to work with it. The new plastic stuff looks terrible.

The new plastic stuff looks terrible because of aesthetic choices. It would still look terrible if it was cast in metal.

The problem is GW design philosophy , you cannot just use the metal molds and use them for resin, each material has its own design requirements, there is a reason why some figures in resin, have the small fine parts in metal, you should use each material for where it is best fitted for

Choose a medium you like (or several), or better yet, choose the miniatures you like and buy them.

Metal wouldn't work for many of my models where I model them to look top heavy or 'impossible' - they'd just tip over constantly. I love converting, which is tons more difficult in metal and sculpting isn't a problem. Having said that, if I find a metal model I like I'll get it - Snikrot from the Ork range was a great metal purchase. There are excellent metal mini companies out there and to neglect them would be a shame.

Finecast is either a poor material or its poorly used, or both. Wouldn't touch it unless I'd checked every model by hand in advance (even the Nurgle marines I bought didn't look right - and they aren't supposed to).

Resin is a great material at times and holds detail really well, but it holds miscasts even better. As long as the QA of the company is good this isn't a problem (shame this isn't true for FW). Lightweight, but a touch too fragile at times. I find it really good for bigger models, where it holds lots of detail and doesn't need to be pinned.

Plastic - great for converting, modern plastics (when done well) look amazing (the Dreamforge plastics for example, not to mention the Sedition Wars minis) and provide greater potential (in my opinion) for unique models (problems with big GW models aside).

All these materials have good bits and bad bits - so mix and match to suit your needs.

Laney

The complaint about plastic holding less detail may apply when an entire figure is stamped out like the old paint set guys from 2nd edition. There will always be limitations to 2-part mold technology, but with CAD, the model can be broken up into various sections and bits, each of which can be positioned and stamped for optimum detail and, when assembled, provide you with a model that has incredible detail everywhere. Haters gonna hate but GW is doing a fantastic job of this. So is Malifaux.

Metal is expensive to use in manufacture and a pain in the rear for the hobbyist to use and/or modify. Larger models are rather heavy and dynamic posing is limited by the possibility of the model being too top heavy or ungainly.

The biggest drawback to resin is that it is slow to produce product. Resin offers the best compromise between plastic and metal in regards to detail and assembly from the hobbyist's point of view but slows down production so much that it is almost not viable from a production standpoint of earnings per square foot of factory space. Once you pour the resin into the mold, you've got to let it sit for a very long time until it cures. Metal can be poured and demolded pretty fast. Plastic can be automated from start to boxed & on pallets ready to ship and let run 24/7 (for the most part).

1.) Plastic kits have high investment and low casting material costs. Still only economic for high runs. No undercuts, though complex mould design can reduce the problem a bit. Details can be done, if the plastic is hard enough, but not fully reaching metal/resin quality (although close). Plastic models are good for high runs, for conversions and variability in hordes.
2.) Metal kits have low investment and medium casting material costs. Undercuts no problem, details no problem. Good for low runs (characters, some elite units), bad for big kits (weight, parts fitting) and conversions by the customer. But then again, these are often specific individual characters fully designed by the sculptor, so they are intended to be good as is.
3.) Resin/Finecast kits have low investment and low casting costs. Converting metal to Finecast kits is onyl limited by customer acceptance, not investment costs. Good for low runs, good for big kits, okay for conversions, bad for delicate parts that can break off. GW also has problems with quality control here.

So Finecast mail order only will reduce the availability and probably number of low run models incl. characters, but give us a bit more of convertible simpler plastic models. Looking at the current GW trend, plastic models get blander, more toylike (Hastings: "Not yet Happy Meal standard") and less detailed (even if more details would have been possible). Best thing would be having both high and low run models. Returning to metal would make characters popular again and eliminate quality control issues at once

I wouldn't call GW's recent plastics "bland"...

 Squigsquasher wrote:
I wouldn't call GW's recent plastics "bland"...

Happy meal toy springs to mind

...Really?

Like what?

 Squigsquasher wrote:
I wouldn't call GW's recent plastics "bland"...

I do. All those GI Joe flyers, Hulk miniatures and not a single wow idea, just:
"Dark Angels? Add wings and cathedrals. Chaos? Add tentacles and spikes."
Like they just have 5 seconds for each concept.

I repeat Hasting's comment here:

Too many flat surfaces devoid of even texture let alone detail. I really don't like any of this stuff apart from the plastic lord. However that's just me, I've discovered a whole heap of other companies that make stuff I like, I'm pleased that so many of you like this release..... the daemon models are nicer though
(...)
I figured out what bugs me about the beefcake of chaos/slaughterbrute it's the teeth, they look like the ones Mark Harrison plastered all over those chaos space marines a few years back, wonder if he did this too? I think the beefcake of chaos is growing on me..... The other stuff not so much lol

For the chariot it's the blatant re-using of the same CAD parts off the warshrine. It's like everything is a CAD kit bash of another kit recently. I wish they'd go back to traditional sculpting as some of GWs guys aren't ready for this type of sculpting yet. There's too much re-using of parts, and too many flat, angular (savage Orc bodies!?) and badly detailed areas (this triangular fur craze) for them to even think there amongst the best models in the world let alone claim to be "the" best.

What companies do you prefer for Chaos stuff? Or is it that you mean other companies have better ranges, worlds and systems not just alternative GW models? Genuinely interested.

As you are genuinely interested ill be happy to tell you.i believe that GWs biggest draw (and their sole greatest possession) are the worlds they've built(for both systems) they are almost living breathing organisms, recently even these have been eroded by the need to just sell sell sell (with stuff like by daemons etc to fight alongside your high elves - just for the sake of selling more models even if it goes against and diminishes 25+ years work) BUT I still honestly feel that their game worlds are second to none.

It's their models/designs/quality/price that are letting them down IMO. The models seem almost lazy in design with numerous "new" kits looking like kitbashes of other kits (just with a big price) check out the DA flyer, the recent woc cavalry etc for examples, it's not that they are bad but lazy, lets look at the slaanesh hell striders, the steed is an iconic beast of slaanesh, I understand that more than one follower of slaanesh would use it and I'm fine with that. It's the design work, the steed is lithe and has heaps of momentum, it looks like its doing 100mph, now take the riders, they look totally unaffected by that motion, for all intents and purposes those marauders could be sat having a pint in bugmans! That's how disjointed the two elements of the model feel, it's like they had the steeds lying around already made (which they did) they just suck a diffent rider on for a fast buck! The same with the skullcrushers, why didn't they at least change up the poses etc of the juggernauts? This kind of thing just seems lazy to me. Now we have the chariot, obviously another cad piece as it shares several parts with the recent war shrine and has loads of strange angles and surfaces that are devoid of texture and detail, like a mass produced child's happy meal toy has. Sure the old chariot was showing its age but it had texture, detail & character, this is just "by numbers" for me and nothing more. Even the posing is getting old now, must every quadricepped creature be stood on its back legs swatting invisible flies? Other companies are making truly dynamic models (using CAD as well as traditional sculpting methods I might add), GW just seems stuck in some awkward "copy paste" phase ATM IMO, they're either A/ struggling for ideas B/ struggling to produce finished items due to time constraints (although the number of sculptors at GW in ratio to the number of models released per month makes me doubt this) C/ trying to use a little effort as possible for as much financial gain as possible I.e. no need to sculpt steeds just the riders will do and that's another kit we can churn out or D/ their target demographic has changed.

My own belief is D. Supported by poor quality (finecrap), very high prices (high turnover clients who don't remain in the hobby)' a dreadful "hobby" magazine so devoid of content that only the pictures must attract a certain consumer - even the 'painting guides' can't really be called that anymore, where's the inspiration?

As for actual systems I'm led to believe Kings of War is very good when compared to WFB, also other systems are seeing greater support than ever before, although these could be linked to price rather than specifically GW game systems being better or worse than those of their competitors.

Do some searching on the net, there are so many companies out there right now making beautiful models, I don't think there's ever been a better time to be in the hobby.... if you are prepared to look beyond citadel's ivory tower.

Sorry about the OT post, although to be fair bits of it discuss the new warriors models so its not all bad

Umm haaaatings you said dragon ogres werent too good? i have to disagree on this one!

Excellent, glad you like them. They're an improvement (IMO) over the previous ones but they could have (IMO) been so much better. They look to me like someone stuck the torso of an ogre on a cow with a lizard tail. The fluff states they are not ogres or related to ogres, the dragon part/reptilian part should/could have been more lithe (IMO). Also why do they look nothing like a shaggoth who is meant to be an ancient Dragon Ogre (that's correct isn't it?). Still it's nice they're now in plastic with different options.

The Emperor and Khorne blesses us this day.

Looks all in all like a backpeddle on GW's part.

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..."

Too bad, too. I really liked these guys once. Almost bought a bunch of those chaos cultists for necromunda.

Would very much like to see finecrap just go away.

Straight up forgeworld buys would have done what this meeple material did, and actuaslly been worth the effort.


Just when you think the beatings were over....

Meanwhile, in the "too many flat surfaces" department, look at Warmachine models. Nothing but flat surfaces.

Spikes and tentacles have always been part of the Chaos aesthetic, just as angelic wings and gothic detailing has always been part of the Dark Angels aesthetic. No point moaning about it now when it's been like that for ages now.

And how exactly are the new fliers "GI Joe"?

Hasting's rant just seemed like one big long promotion of any company that isn't GW. Now that GW is the most popular wargaming company at the moment, it's become fashionable to bash them. If anyone leveled complaints at the Warmachine models for their ludicrous designs and flat, dull "details" or the Kingdom Death models for being, quite frankly, tasteless and stupid (tentacle rape boob monster, 3-faced giant with enormous penis anyone?) then they'd just get shouted at for being a "GW White Knight". Criticism of GW has reached such ludicrous levels that it is impossible to take hater's rantings seriously anymore.

If you don't like the designs, then fine. But don't say that they're actually bad or lazy. Because they really aren't. The amount of work that goes into making models is staggering, so you should at least appreciate that.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
If you don't like the designs, then fine. But don't say that they're actually bad or lazy. Because they really aren't. The amount of work that goes into making models is staggering, so you should at least appreciate that.

I don't like the designs and find them bad and lazy. There, I did it, despite your orders. They are devoid of character and inspiration, sometimes even contradicting established GW fluff ("We just took great pains to separate Daemons and human warriors." "Shutup, just add Daemons with spikes and tentacles to the Warriors, and I don't want to see one unmutated model, is that clear!"). Hasting's gave several good examples of copy-paste-CAD-lazyness.

Last inspiring GW releases were Dark Eldar (because Jes got full control on design and production) and the CSM part of the starter, with Necron releases being quite okay.

So why not remix their Resin? Having a go at it then saying f it when it produces lower than expected results is a bit extreme. Being the biggest company in the industry by far should allow for decent R&D. But we all know what happens when big companies don't innovate (i was at Nokia until recently...).

Plastics are generally my fav material and something no one has picked up on is that they also take paint better than metals and fcast (well they seem to anyway for me).

I recently brought some fake stuff and the detail was almost spot on but the biggest thing was that the peices were study and not fcast bent (though god knows what they are made of... this is China after all). How can you make worse products than fake Chinese copies???

[Mod: No racial characterisations, please.]

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Meanwhile, in the "too many flat surfaces" department, look at Warmachine models. Nothing but flat surfaces.

Spikes and tentacles have always been part of the Chaos aesthetic, just as angelic wings and gothic detailing has always been part of the Dark Angels aesthetic. No point moaning about it now when it's been like that for ages now.

And how exactly are the new fliers "GI Joe"?

Hasting's rant just seemed like one big long promotion of any company that isn't GW. Now that GW is the most popular wargaming company at the moment, it's become fashionable to bash them. If anyone leveled complaints at the Warmachine models for their ludicrous designs and flat, dull "details" or the Kingdom Death models for being, quite frankly, tasteless and stupid (tentacle rape boob monster, 3-faced giant with enormous penis anyone?) then they'd just get shouted at for being a "GW White Knight". Criticism of GW has reached such ludicrous levels that it is impossible to take hater's rantings seriously anymore.

If you don't like the designs, then fine. But don't say that they're actually bad or lazy. Because they really aren't. The amount of work that goes into making models is staggering, so you should at least appreciate that.

As Squigsquasher, where would we be without you.

If you had been around for longer, you would know that the 'GW bashing', as you call it - at least at this level, where more people than not are disparaging against some of the new releases, is a recent issue of the past couple of years. To take one example, when GW were producing miniature kits that looked like they weren't aimed at a place under a 12-year old's Christmas tree, then the comments reflected that. When there were indeed spikes and tentacles on chaos miniatures, but those were used in a tempered manner, to fit the aesthetic whole of the piece, rather than just put over everything and making the miniature look like a jumbled mess - again, the comments reflect that.

When the Dark Eldar were released, they received practically universal praise for the miniature line and rightly so; from any miniature design perspective they were wonderfully conceptualised and designed models. If a new model, like the new Zoid-like chaos flyer for instance, is lambasted by a good 75% of the community. Then, there is probably a good reason for that.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Last inspiring GW releases were Dark Eldar (because Jes got full control on design and production) and the CSM part of the starter, with Necron releases being quite okay.

I am Chinese because i am in China and i am on an English speaking website? Did you not see i was also taking the pee out of the Chinese fake industry also? I was trying to point out that GW... With its big budget should be way ahead of the game. The fakes are as good (in the detail) but they also do not have bubbles in them or snap in to pieces so easily.
I am not trying to endorse buying fakes (it was the first time i did and some stuff is geniuely hard to get here - such as mail order for instance) just pointing out something i observed... But you go.all racial on me... Thats always a good arguement.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
You're Chinese. Of course you would say the Chinese fakes were better. You're probably payed by the government to promote Chinese business.

Every post you make just pains such a funny picture.

Sigh...So now I'm being accused of being racist...Again.

You know what? I give up.

You lot are obviously so dedicated to ranting and raving about how evil GW is and how anyone who likes them and doesn't play Warmahordes or Infinity is an idiot or a white knight that there really is no point talking to you.

Apparently not hating GW is equivalent to being a holocaust denier on this forum.

Screw this, I'm outta here.

I dunno about this... "Stuffs for kids these days". Looking in rogue trader with some clown like faces and flambouyant color schemes that they had going on.... Wasn't that a bit childish? Also didn't people complain it was all too Grim Dark??? Well now you get Dinobots and Flying Churches.... What's next? :-p


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I love GW. I really do. I just think in some areas they could do better (being the market leader and all).

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Sigh...So now I'm being accused of being racist...Again.

You know what? I give up.

You lot are obviously so dedicated to ranting and raving about how evil GW is and how anyone who likes them and doesn't play Warmahordes or Infinity is an idiot or a white knight that there really is no point talking to you.

Apparently not hating GW is equivalent to being a holocaust denier on this forum.

Screw this, I'm outta here.

Exalt!

Most (unintentionally) hilarious post in Dakka history. I'm calling it now.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Meanwhile, in the "too many flat surfaces" department, look at Warmachine models. Nothing but flat surfaces.

I wouldn't say that PP do any better, but I would argue there are plenty of other companies doing better stuff.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Spikes and tentacles have always been part of the Chaos aesthetic, just as angelic wings and gothic detailing has always been part of the Dark Angels aesthetic. No point moaning about it now when it's been like that for ages now.

I liked the way they were trying to do with the CSMs (ie the new raptors and the chosen/culstists from DV) but instead of giving us more of that they gave us dino-bots. Again, I like the knew DA knight termis but the land speeder thing just looks like a toy. They can get the aesthetics right but then they go and throw in some large model that doesn't fit at all.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
And how exactly are the new fliers "GI Joe"?

It is overly simple and not aerodynamic?

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Hasting's rant just seemed like one big long promotion of any company that isn't GW. Now that GW is the most popular wargaming company at the moment, it's become fashionable to bash them. If anyone leveled complaints at the Warmachine models for their ludicrous designs and flat, dull "details" or the Kingdom Death models for being, quite frankly, tasteless and stupid (tentacle rape boob monster, 3-faced giant with enormous penis anyone?) then they'd just get shouted at for being a "GW White Knight". Criticism of GW has reached such ludicrous levels that it is impossible to take hater's rantings seriously anymore.

How can it be promoting any company other than GW, is that not just bashing GW? And no it is not that becoming the most popular has made it cool to bash them. They have been most popular for decades and they have used that popularity to bully other companies and raise prices again and again and again. Again I do not like PP models but Kingdom Death, I'll give you a lot of it is tasteless but it is aimed at mature gamers and aesthetics aside the models are BEAUTIFUL because they are sculpted well and have lots of detail. I have not seen anyone called a "GW White Knight" for bashing any other company, though if you were to argue that Avatars of War's Warriors of the Apoc are not as good as the new Forsaken I probably would.
Have you ever considered the reason that people rant about GW (and that we can have threads about bad things they have done get past 30 pages) is because, as a company, they are making decisions that do not benefit (or in most cases actually hurt) us, their customers?

 Squigsquasher wrote:
If you don't like the designs, then fine. But don't say that they're actually bad or lazy. Because they really aren't. The amount of work that goes into making models is staggering, so you should at least appreciate that.

I don't like some of the recent designs BECAUSE they feel lazy or, imo, are just bad. Yes a lot of work goes into them but as has already been pointed out CAD is making everything easier and the Hellstriders are literally just new riders on old mounts.

Difficult to argue with a troll.

But nobody here says GW is evil, we are only flabbergasted at how dumb the higher management is in artificially thowing away the competence of its design team and burrying it under an abyssmal marketing and pricing policy. Their attempt at rising the prices 50% in just one year, starting at a point when price hikes already barely compensate for falling sales, is just unbelievable and economic suicide.

And you are the only one talking about how good Privateer Press is, in this thread. While Warmachine sells more than Warhammer Fantasy in USA, their pricing policy is also questionable with 5 metal riders 60-80 US-$.

Personally I think PP charges what they do for their models because they saw GW doing it and thought they could get away with it, too.

Agree with Sid. Copy the big boy... Except as i said before. The big boy should be using big boy skills to innovate. I say keep resin... Just up the game in terms of production and QA. Also give us a price break ;-)

 Sidstyler wrote:
Personally I think PP charges what they do for their models because they saw GW doing it and thought they could get away with it, too.

Crack dealers don't lower prices on crack when their customers are willing to do whatever it takes to pay the prices because they can't live without the drugs, no matter how much they actually dislike them.

I think everyone prices based upon GW. The larger market they gain, the closer to GW's prices they get. The only reason the small fish undercut GW is not because they are heroes doing the will of the people, there is no other way to squeeze in without being cheaper. As soon as they become popular, they will slowly increase prices to make more profit, or as they say... "we are new at this and had no idea it cost this much to make minis... as we do new things it costs more."

And a new drug is born.

40K isn't a drug nkelsch. GW aren't drug dealers.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
40K isn't a drug nkelsch. GW aren't drug dealers.

But yet... people who claim to have quit buying due to dissatisfaction continue to fall over themselves to buy new models they apparently hate... Almost as if addicted.

People can and are addicted to games and collecting. They are very real addictions people have that come at the expense of their health, financial stability, personal relations and families. I have known marriages which have broken up over hoarding tendencies related to wargaming. I have seen families torn apart due to neglect from people not maintaining healthy balances with wargaming.

World of warcraft is actually worse on people's lives than many drugs.

The way people continue to be unable to buy an incessantly complain while still buying shows addiction, especially for people who have tens of thousands of unpainted GW models, claims to quit buying GW models then continues to buy new releases *AFTER* they have claimed to not be buying because they are dissatisfied. Lying to others is one thing, but those people are lying to themselves, a very dangerous sign of real addiction.

The only way to have feedback heard in the marketplace is to withhold purchasing... Something people in this community are incapable of doing. They think complaining while endlessly purchasing will work.

What proof have you that "GW haters" are still buying their kits? I don't, and I challenge any you you to prove otherwise.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
What proof have you that "GW haters" are still buying their kits? I don't, and I challenge any you you to prove otherwise.

Usually thier posting habits and gallery threads...

Especially when people explicitly said "I refuse to buy the stormraven because it is ugly and GW screwed Australia and is immoral" and then less than days later they post "Oh Chapterhouse kit is sweet! I am buying 2 stormravens now!"

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Sigh...So now I'm being accused of being racist...Again.

You know what? I give up.

You lot are obviously so dedicated to ranting and raving about how evil GW is and how anyone who likes them and doesn't play Warmahordes or Infinity is an idiot or a white knight that there really is no point talking to you.

Apparently not hating GW is equivalent to being a holocaust denier on this forum.

Screw this, I'm outta here.

Actually assuming someone posting from China is a government mouthpiece, which is nothing more than some sort of negative stereotype, and accusing them of such on a public forum IS pretty racist, albeit at the minor end of the scale.

As for ranting and raving against GW? Like many others, I love 40k and I care about it and it hurts me on some level when I see it being so badly abused to wring as much profit from unsuspecting parents as possible, when it could be so much more than it currently is.

I will continue to play 40k, but I will find anyway possible to ensure as little of my money reaches GW as when I want to buy something. I'm also keen to start Infinity, and will start Warmahordes one day if the minis get less fugly. I don't think I'm somehow superior for looking outside the Warhammer universe for my gaming, basically a change in personal circumstances combined with GW's unrelenting turning of the screw caused me to look a bit further afield and I liked what I saw. If I was content with the state of the game as it is I would have happily stayed with the game I've loved since I was a schoolboy and never even thought to look.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Sigh...So now I'm being accused of being racist...Again.

You know what? I give up.

You lot are obviously so dedicated to ranting and raving about how evil GW is and how anyone who likes them and doesn't play Warmahordes or Infinity is an idiot or a white knight that there really is no point talking to you.

Apparently not hating GW is equivalent to being a holocaust denier on this forum.

Screw this, I'm outta here.

Actually assuming someone posting from China is a government mouthpiece, which is nothing more than some sort of negative stereotype, and accusing them of such on a public forum IS pretty racist, albeit at the minor end of the scale.

As for ranting and raving against GW? Like many others, I love 40k and I care about it and it hurts me on some level when I see it being so badly abused to wring as much as profit from unsuspecting parents as possible, when it could be so much more than it currently is.

I will continue to play 40k, but I will find anyway possible to ensure as little of my money reaches GW as possible when I want to buy something. I'm also keen to start Infinity, and will start Warmahordes one day if the minis get less fugly. I don't think I'm somehow superior for looking outside the Warhammer universe for my gaming, basically a change in personal circumstances combined with GW's unrelenting turning of the screw caused me to look a bit further afield and I liked what I saw. If I was content with the state of the game as it is I would have happily stayed with the game I've loved since I was a schoolboy and never even thought to look.

That's fair enough. I can see that I came across as a little offensive. I retract my former statement.

nkelsch wrote:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
What proof have you that "GW haters" are still buying their kits? I don't, and I challenge any you you to prove otherwise.

Usually thier posting habits and gallery threads...

Especially when people explicitly said "I refuse to buy the stormraven because it is ugly and GW screwed Australia and is immoral" and then less than days later they post "Oh Chapterhouse kit is sweet! I am buying 2 stormravens now!"

Pithy anecdotes are hardly data, though. Anonymous and vague ones, doubly so. Could you produce those posts upon request, for examle?

Well also I am a limey c**t just like a lot of you on here :-)
In fact I am that white I'd probably pass the Daz door step challenge!

Anyway GW is not evil, not out to hate on us and it certainly isn't helping drug cartels launder money ala HSBC (well at least i hope not). We can just only hope that the company doesn't run itself aground.

After all 40k is probably the most expansive, grimy, believable yet unbelievable fictional place around and I love every minute I spend in it. The reality part (such as cost & bad customer service) can be, for the most part, forgotten when you are talking to like minded people who love to throw some dice about and move toy soldiers around a table.

Long live Warhammer & Warhammer 40k!

This seems quite plausible, though it seems more likely to me that it will be less due to them believing 'finecast is rubbish' and more due to them making it more awkward for online/flgs.

GW is not evil. It is out to exploit us as much as possible though, and I, for one, can't really tell the difference at this end.

 azreal13 wrote:
GW is not evil. It is out to exploit us as much as possible though, and I, for one, can't really tell the difference at this end.

You must be uncomfortable with pretty much every company going, particularly the types the pray on fan addiction (WoW, Football/Any Sport, Fast Food chains, Apple)

Keeping briefly on topic, I would not be surprised by the rumours, I strongly argued over the years that GW having the technology and manufacturing in house does not have great costs to make plastic moulds and they proved it first by producing single monoposed characters for fantasy and later without any reasonable doubt by producing a limited edition plastic model, if the economics of making a plastic kit were so huge a limited run plastic kit would be out of the question, finecast was a really bad decision they needed it for a stop gap between converting to plastic, but they should just make plastic molds for everything and skip finecast, they didn't because they prefer to sell decades old stuff and not do aggressive redesigns.

Now on the debate that has more interest to me, the quality with present technology assuming top level effort from the sculptors/ mold makers casters is:

Resin > Metal > Plastic

Resin holds the best detail and has the least shrinkage and allows undercuts, it takes time to be manufactured though is tricky to be assembled especially if warping happens and needs some consideration in cleaning since resin dust is not safe, overall it is a really preferred medium in garage kits and detail enhancer kits, because of its low cost as a material, holding great detail, small weight (most garage kit figures are huge) and the limited volume resin kits usually are produced, because of its nature it is also preferred for vehicles and terain, because lets face it a metal hill or tank would be astonishingly heavy a big downside is how brittle resin can be in a wargaming environment small parts can fail dramatically from everyday usage.

Metal is a traditional material for wargaming, it allows great detail, although not as great as resin, allows big production, has low cost in casting materials and of course allows undercuts, it has issues with shrinking but a good mouldmaker takes them into account and by its nature is heavy, it is preferred for wargaming because it is easy to manufacture can support industrial scale production and is (according to the mix of course) a tough material that can withstand easily tabletop usage.

Plastic is another medium, its the cheapest material to produce and this offsets its relatively to the two above described materials high molding costs (metallic mould and injection plastic machine) this is further reduced by the fact a metal mould will last for a lifetime if no weird accident happens and that an injection machine can run unattended and automated, it is ideal for really large scale production and has the advantage that a solvent can be used as a glue effectively melting parts together instead of traditionally gluing them, it cannot hold undercuts though and this alone reduces the amount of detail it can hold dramatically, it is a really preferred medium for vehicles and terrain because they are big and usually do not have areas were undercuts are important, but its limitation of metal inflexible moulds mean that models especially dynamic ones must be cut in many many parts adding to the assembly time.

For me plastic and its status as a much cherished material came from GWs propaganda above anything else, people long time in the hobby can remember how they advertised it so much in the past, it would be cheap, light, easier to to work with than their metals and something their opponents at that time and until recently simply did not have, it is a defining characteristic (we have it they do not) that set them apart regardless of its merits or flaws and something that really helped them in their bottom line, so they got two birds hit with one stone, both setting them aside from competition by giving something the others could not give, creating a demand for something they had exclusivity and making people demand something it costed them less to produce.

I firmly believe that without GW plastic would not be in such demand and it shows how influential GW really is.

Metal has again had its bad reputation mainly from GW whose metal models were nothing to write home about and I have worked with all generations of GW metal models from the lead RT era models were enough pressure could leave your fingerprint on them (yes I have one such marine) to the white metal era lead free (not really but 5% or less lead counts as lead free) models that were chunky misaligned and full of flash, yes, dealing with a 1mm misaligned body can be deadfull, having to pin joints that are simply flat ends is tiresome at best, especially if you need to do it 30 times and having boring monoposed models flatly aligned with the moulds cut is uninspiring, but and it is a big BUT, GW is not the only one out there, other manufacturers did and still do better than that, CB manages to produce metal models that go together without pinning, have already modeled in them attachment points to support assembly and in many cases are even mouldline free, same goes with many other companies including freebooters, hasslefree, GZG and others.

Resin while having a long tradition in models I feel is a "recent" true addition in wargaming, fueling many parts manufacturers terrain manufacturers and recently with "plastic resin" introduction going to the more proper larger production, I feel it still needs some time to define itself.

I feel that the big argument here really is single posed or multi posed models, something that people think its a metal VS plastic argument, plastic is not friendlier to work with when faced with single posed models and the recent GW single posed plastic models illustrate it, metal could be multi posed, but I hardly see a reason why do so, after all why make a model blunt generic posed in order to stick many things on it when you can more simply and cheaply make another metal model, on the other hand a plastic mould benefits from this blunt posing and split on parts both because it helps with the undercuts issue and because it allows fewer kits needed for an army it also nicely passes the torch of dynamic models to the modeler, been easy to cut conversions are "easy" so make your own dynamic poses or mix and match many kits to make something more individual, personally I prefer single posed models, the dynamic that can have even if this means they have to be multypart far exceeds anything a stock multiposed kit can produce, if I have to convert something I find it takes equal effort to alter the sculpt regardless of medium multiposed models only having an advantage in swap-able parts been available (if the ecosystem is well designed), I could give any example from Infinity's range for that, but to use an example that most of us are familiar with the newest Spacehulk terminators versus any terminator kit GW has produced, monoposed multipart models with good dynamic poses and great detail, versus blunt generic posed models that can be easily swapped together, if one would want to alter a terminator kit model (any kit) to a spacehulk dynamic model it would need quite some cutting and resculpting.

Spacehulk also illustrates the limitations of plastic, terminators had to be cut in many pieces to be dynamic, genestealers are flat and in some cases miss a limb because of the undercut limitation, even the terminators suffer to a lesser extend from this, looking at recent GW releases and those monoposed plastic ladies they produced, the dark elf sorceress and the vampires show again the limitation plastic has with the undercuts and how poorly it can sometimes depict organic forms, something metal and resin have no issue with with their flexible moulds even if it means sometimes the mould gets quickly destroyed.

And with that I will have to add that beyond all that the design philosophy is important, GW with their "use the mould eternally" philosophy and fast industrial production mentality avoid dynamic poses that would tear the mould apart, go for thick models and do not try to be adventurous, others are much more adventurous and dynamic even in their single posed models and in many cases take the risk to make models that will tear the mould apart relatively quick in order to deliver a cool looking odel.

Now as a really side note, I honestly cannot understand the comment about Infinity models been blunt, they have dynamic poses, each line has aesthetically almost nothing in common with the other! one could argue that a line that over 50% is the same power armour with X thing stuck on it, more than 50% have the same weapons aesthetically and sculls everywhere should be considered quite blunt.

nkelsch wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
40K isn't a drug nkelsch. GW aren't drug dealers.

But yet... people who claim to have quit buying due to dissatisfaction continue to fall over themselves to buy new models they apparently hate... Almost as if addicted.

People can and are addicted to games and collecting. They are very real addictions people have that come at the expense of their health, financial stability, personal relations and families. I have known marriages which have broken up over hoarding tendencies related to wargaming. I have seen families torn apart due to neglect from people not maintaining healthy balances with wargaming.

World of warcraft is actually worse on people's lives than many drugs.

The way people continue to be unable to buy an incessantly complain while still buying shows addiction, especially for people who have tens of thousands of unpainted GW models, claims to quit buying GW models then continues to buy new releases *AFTER* they have claimed to not be buying because they are dissatisfied. Lying to others is one thing, but those people are lying to themselves, a very dangerous sign of real addiction.

The only way to have feedback heard in the marketplace is to withhold purchasing... Something people in this community are incapable of doing. They think complaining while endlessly purchasing will work.

No.

Make no mistake. Ever since the train wreck that is finecraps came on scene I was never a fan. Along with the other scholck that GW continues to amaze and bedazzle with, THIS is the one and truly gobsmash idea that just needs to be... unthought of.

As was commented above, GW would have done themselves and thier namebrand/ reputation a service to have just stuck to the resin ALA forgeworld.

There is no addiction here, either. Haven't bought GW since they took the piss with the pricegouge from.... two years ago or so, the aussie thing, now, and the continued increased price for decreased quality in thier overall... everything.
Not intending to, either, because every time I begin to soften my stance, they one up me and do something or another that is equally as dumb, if not worse. At this point, I like to use them as the example of the little turd that could... have if they would have made some effort.

That "New and Improved WD? A trainwreck.
The Dark Angels rerererelease... underwhelming, however many skulls and wings.
The chaose started out of the gate and begant to progressivly take the piss.
The "6th Edition..." is just not as ... how would you say... exciting, I guess if for a better word. Nothing other then the silly "oh, heres a $99.99 starter set that has exactly less then the one you bought when you started out at 45.00.

They don't even care. and I think that is exactly what is the worst about it, so when KS jumps in your wallet feet first, don't cry... That is what progresses when you sit on your laurals and act like your the only thing going.

After awhile, as the LGS's all move on, because you've outpriced your target audence? You can sit in your one man stores, and wonder why they start closing as fast as you open them.

By and BY? All the ranting and raving about white knights and chinese rebel casters in the world won't change the fact that thier overall quality is taking a nosedive BECAUSE OF FINECAST.

Reapers Bones, are much softer then the silly gits, yet not an issue on them yet. I've seen two exactly so far.

A giant, and a basic fighter/ knight. Bought the knight, and the quality of the sculpt, irregardless of the medium- is spot on to the metal 100%.

Other figure companies out there have gone the way of several different types of plastics/ resin combinations, yet the exact same issue- No miscasts of every other one, no air bubbles, no excuses.

Smaller shops doing more with less... MMM who would have thought.

All in all? It just seems to me that the whole idea from Day 1 was executed with the usual disregard that GW is continuing to show for themselves, the so called "Players", and over all gaming in general. You know the worst thing about it by now is that it is becoming a running joke that everyone gets but them.

I still have a serious collection of even unmade and new stuff STILL at the house, as well. I keep it in hopes that GW would have eventually come to thier senses and got thier stuff together. It isn't my fault that they don't. It is entirly on them.
I do bust thier hump quite a bit, but it isn't just something I decided to do one day. It started with one slip, then another greed play, then another miscast, then a pissed rules set, then a sloppy codex, till the point of "Hey there, sports fans, we are moving the goalpost, another few feet.... here is FINECAST, 100% Better then metal... cheaper, too!"

It isn't just because everyone got out of bed one day and said, "Gee, you know I really need to start hating GW and busting on them any chance I can get for no other reason then because its the cool thing to do..."

As much as they boast about being a so called "leader", they are going the exact way of GM, Ford, and American Autos did in the eighties...

We all know how well that ended up.

As to the G.I.Joe comment- I'll throw one out at you for what that chaos stuff looks like.

ZOIDS.

http://zoids.wikia.com/wiki/Evoflyer

http://zoids.wikia.com/wiki/Energy_Liger

http://zoids.wikia.com/wiki/Ultrasaurus

It's not addiction, it is genuine horror, as to "What else can they do to top this, or the other, dumb!@#$ move by the company?".

Pretty much yep... Though quite often, the rabid fans of them receive my ire as well.

In saying that, I'll quite happily support something from those companies, if they are doing something I wish.

Did I buy an ipod? Yep. Did I look at getting an Ipad? Nope, the Nexus was a better product for me.

Do I actually feel like having a McDonalds once every 4 months, actually yes...

nkelsch wrote:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
What proof have you that "GW haters" are still buying their kits? I don't, and I challenge any you you to prove otherwise.

Usually thier posting habits and gallery threads...

Especially when people explicitly said "I refuse to buy the stormraven because it is ugly and GW screwed Australia and is immoral" and then less than days later they post "Oh Chapterhouse kit is sweet! I am buying 2 stormravens now!"

Yeah they blatantly do like. I pointed this out two years ago! The ones that get the most angry are the ones with the most invested in the hobby, it's entirely logical. In fact we can easily test the hypothesis... Observe.

For example, all kinds of gak GW does is daft in my eyes, the prices are bordering on insane, the advertising guys seem to be ignoring how the rest of the business world operates, and white dwarf is as much fun to read as a parking ticket, but I don't get ANGRY about it because I've only got a toe in the hobby. I reckon I've spent about.. 700-800 US dollars total on the hobby in the last decade.

Now, if I was to name two people that seem to get really pissed about things.. let's say HBMC, and Agamemnon2

Be honest, how much have you spent in the last decade?

Conclusion - I'll bet my arse cheeks you are both over $5000. Hence the real anger, the occasional needless insults and accusations of "white knighting" when people strongly disagree about GW's actions and a generally quite worrying attitude towards what should merely be a pleasant relaxing past time.

Please be aware, I'm not trying to mock people, I think really dedicating yourself to something is in some ways a really positive thing, I'm just saying, it's an obvious conclusion that the people with the most interest are going to be the ones that take things most personally.

Surely that's irrefutable?

Over 5k in the past ten years? Unlikely. Of that decade, I've only been playing for about four years, and the overwhelming amount of my models are either secondhand, pre-2000 or discount purchases. In the past few months, I've spent 15€ on GW merchandise (I needed a new set of metal paints) bought retail, plus one Eldar Dreadnought from the early 1990s, which is currently being dismembered and repurposed. My "investment" in the hobby is at an all-time low.

Furthermore, I'm much more likely to polysyllabically and sardonically insult people than call them "white knights". That's a schtick I'll leave to other people. No, to see me angry, you'd need to attend different forums altogether, dedicated to my other hobbies.

@mattyrm

All reasonable comments IMO, but I think you have to factor in tine as well as money. Ten years is a long time to be involved no question, but some go back even further.

For instance I owned the original Rogue Trader, started actively playing in 2nd and can remember rules for whole games being published in White Dwarf (such as Confrontation which ultimately evolved into Necromunda)

Now it would be folly to argue that things were empirically better back then, but those who remember when GW was a company run by hobbyists for hobbyists, when innovation and creativity were the norm and things weren't made to cater to the lowest common denominator, are bound to be frustrated by the state of things as they are now.

Like yourself I try to maintain a balance, many more of my friends are outside of wargaming than in it, but I can't help but feel frustrated by the current state of things compared to what I remember from back in the day.

My name is Will and I'm a resinholic

Zanderchief wrote:You must be uncomfortable with pretty much every company going, particularly the types the pray on fan addiction (WoW, Football/Any Sport, Fast Food chains, Apple)

You're right of course. Although previously I suppose the wargaming industry had been small enough to not be subject to this kind of thing. Probably looking at it in general terms, the transformation of Games Workshop from 'by gamers, for gamers' to 'run by suits' was never going to be popular with long-term fans. But, presumably the share holders are happy to a point, and anyone new to the game won't know any different.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Sigh...So now I'm being accused of being racist...Again.

You know what? I give up.

You lot are obviously so dedicated to ranting and raving about how evil GW is and how anyone who likes them and doesn't play Warmahordes or Infinity is an idiot or a white knight that there really is no point talking to you.

Apparently not hating GW is equivalent to being a holocaust denier on this forum.

Screw this, I'm outta here.

First of all, kudos for racial stereotyping and comparing your situation to that of a holocaust denier within 2 posts of each other. I believe a first on Dakka

Seriously mate though, take a break. If what you are reading here is upsetting you so much, then why try to continue getting wound-up over it? There are plenty of less critical places on the web, and I'm sure several Tyranid focused one which will no doubt have a lot more about just the models/painting, and less discussion about the wider industry.

 Kroothawk wrote:

faj3r over at Warseer wrote:I heard, from reliable source, that all finecast are going to be mail-order exclusive (my source gave it as a fact)

Comment was that it's possible, that the're going into plastic with characters - instead of finecast and metal - because it's cheaper and technology of plastic miniatures they have great these days (that I think is my source speculation)

IMHO it is possible - because finecast sales is (as I heard) very low, and almost everyone call it crap - and people are looking for the old metals on ebay, quality of plastic miniatures form Island of Blood for example or Vengeance is remarkable, and going back to metal it would be confess that finecast was a big mistake so it wouldn't be politically correct

75hastings69 wrote:I have HEARD via my sources that finecrap has pretty much been recognised as not fit for purpose, and within the timeframe I gave in that thread it is as Starfarer suggests that GW will go pretty much 100% plastic. They are presenting (or getting together the presentation) that FineCAST was only ever a stop gap, and that plastic is the real future.....

Plastic may well be the future, but not if its all angular CAD sculpted soul-less crap, with increasingly less detail..... that's not the future, I can buy that kind of cartoony crap now from PP!

Plastic is my medium of choice, so I applaud a move to all plastic.

This all plastic rumour shouldn't be attributed to me, I'm just passing on what I've heard.

A week ago, on 18th January:

75hastings69 wrote:It depends, when the inferior product (FineCAST) is sooooooo much cheaper to produce than the superior product (metal because of he price of the raw product) then even if everyone returned their models 10 times (which they don't) they'd STILL make more profit than selling 1 perfect metal cast. I'm not making this up its fact! There is however a long term goal, although its a bit shorter now and should be seen in the next 2 - 3 years if my sources are correct FineCAST is not work in progress it's a live product that is on sale to the public, it was work in progress for the minimum 8 months before public launch that they were meant to be testing it!

Try checking a blister/box for casting flaws, if Finecast gets mail order only

Well, as some one that runs gaming stores and orders direct from GW, I can tell you this is pretty much already happening. Every week when I re-order, most of the finecast I need "Has been moved to direct". I have less and less GW product on my wall, for the simple reason GW won't sell it to me. They will graciously allow me to pay at a much higher rate, and get the product in generic white label packaging. Somehow, paying more for a badly packaged product hasn't worked well. I still do special orders, but quit trying to keep the whole line in stock.

My blister display is a fraction of what it used to be, and getting smaller. All new releases are temporary. For instance, I got Belial in with the new DA releases, and I already can't reorder him. Finecast is leaving all stores, both independent and GW.

GW used to have a clue. They encouraged stores to carry more stock, so they could sell more models. Now that they have cut what I can carry, they wonder why I'm selling less. I explain the same thing over and over. The higher ups don't care, lower level sales reps have no power.

Less GW on my wall = less sales of GW in the store = more of other peoples games I sell to make up with it.

Out of curiosity, Mikhalia, what has been increasing in % wall space and hopefully sales in your stores? I know you've had problems in the past with PP restocks so I'm curious to see who is doing it right in your opinion.

Man. I've always found Mikhaila to be one of the most level headed posters with regard to GW. If he's posting stuff like this, then that really is a bad sign!

It really goes to show just how much the "GW hate" consensus has set in on Dakka when a thread about Finecast (widely hated here) going away is met with comments insulting GW!

 mattyrm wrote:
Now, if I was to name two people that seem to get really pissed about things.. let's say HBMC, and Agamemnon2

Aggy doesn't get "really pissed about things". He's just generally morose and melancholic. There's a difference.

 mikhaila wrote:
GW used to have a clue. They encouraged stores to carry more stock, so they could sell more models. Now that they have cut what I can carry, they wonder why I'm selling less. I explain the same thing over and over. The higher ups don't care, lower level sales reps have no power.

Less GW on my wall = less sales of GW in the store = more of other peoples games I sell to make up with it.

Do you have any reasonable explanation, why GW keeps on making business decisions that have been proven to hurt their sales?
Or all those 50% price hikes lately?
To me all this looks like unprovoked economic suicide. Even in a yes-company, there must be some manager with basic economic knowledge and/or common sense.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Do you have any reasonable explanation, why GW keeps on making business decisions that have been proven to hurt their sales?
Or all those 50% price hikes lately?
To me all this looks like unprovoked economic suicide. Even in a yes-company, there must be some manager with basic economic knowledge and/or common sense.

I do-- those things are generally not real. "50% price hikes" are a myth. Many armies literally now cost less than they did in 2004. Internet naysayers aside, GW is doing very well. Most people don't have the full picture and even those that claim to are often looking at things through a very biased lens.

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Do you have any reasonable explanation, why GW keeps on making business decisions that have been proven to hurt their sales?
Or all those 50% price hikes lately?
To me all this looks like unprovoked economic suicide. Even in a yes-company, there must be some manager with basic economic knowledge and/or common sense.

I do-- those things are generally not real. "50% price hikes" are a myth. Many armies literally now cost less than they did in 2004. Internet naysayers aside, GW is doing very well. Most people don't have the full picture and even those that claim to are often looking at things through a very biased lens.

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

Out of idle curiosity, how do you substantiate that armies cost less than in 2004? Do you mean per point? Because that's a fallacy of logic. Otherwise, I'd be interested to see the math on it.

Hobbit Starter Box 50% more than LOTR Starter Box.
Dark Talon 66% more than Storm Talon (same 2 sprues, slightly modified).
Chaos Chariot 50% more than HE chariot (also with 2 different builds).
Throgg 66% more than comparable Ogre characters.
DA Land Speeder 100% more than same sized Land Speeder Storm.
All army books and Codices more than 100% more than previous edition at release.
Tell me these are all myth.
And I haven't yet started on Fantasy's new focus on big infantry units in 3000 point games.

 Kingsley wrote:
It really goes to show just how much the "GW hate" consensus has set in on Dakka when a thread about Finecast (widely hated here) going away is met with comments insulting GW!

Being disappointed with a modeling medium is one issue. Fearing that the loss of the medium will lead to more limited options or losing your one defense against the poor medium (checking blisters before purchase) is entirely another.

I'm a big proponent of just going back to metal. It was the best of all the worlds, for detail, price and strength, and had few downsides. There has never been a single (normal) figure in the nearly 20 years I've been collecting and painting 40K (not counting large, multi-part monsters) that I ever had a lick of trouble with in metal, where what I've seen of Finecast has scared me off ever, ever buying a single model in that material, and I refuse to pay even more than metal models for those in a medium whose entire reason for being was because the high price of metal made it a cheaper medium to work in!

I would totally support the replacement of Finecast with plastic models, especially with the quality GW has shown they can produce with the Space Hulk figures, the Dark Vengeance models, and the new characters that are plastic. But the price point that they would be set at (and are at right now) is completely absurd for what you get, and won't support something that would jack the prices up even more.

They talk about how much it costs to strike a mold for plastic figures, and how "that drives the sale price so high". Absolute load of bull. They expect us to believe that they can produce something like Dark Vengeance for the price it is, with the quantity of unique sculpts inside but then sell single sprue, monopose figures of the exact same type for $25 apiece?

Granted, Dark Vengeance is priced at a *very* high price point for an intro game, but the same line of reasoning from above would make Dark Vengeance cost several hundred dollars. Going by what their new plastic Chaos Aspiring Champion costs ($20), just the seven Chaos Marines in DV would run $140US if produced outside of that box.

Many armies literally now cost less than they did in 2004.

Sorry, no. I can't think of a single army I own that could possibly cost less now than in any point in 40K history, even taking inflation into account. And that's just the models. Back in 2004 I was paying 15 dollars for a codex, or 25 if it was something like DA that needed one book and then a minidex.

And it's nowhere near the Golden Age, just the easiest to buy off-the-shelf. The decade from 2000-2010 was much healthier, in my opinion.

Obviously, because those 20 Guardsmen I got in 2004 for £12 are way cheaper to buy nowadays, when they're only £18 for 10 of them!

Also, the Space Marine battleforce is a lot cheaper now at £80, than it is was just 3 years ago at £50.

Seventy... five... dollar... Land... Raiders.

 Kingsley wrote:
I do-- those things are generally not real. "50% price hikes" are a myth. Many armies literally now cost less than they did in 2004. Internet naysayers aside, GW is doing very well. Most people don't have the full picture and even those that claim to are often looking at things through a very biased lens.

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

This has to be a troll.

You're trolling right?

 Scottywan82 wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Do you have any reasonable explanation, why GW keeps on making business decisions that have been proven to hurt their sales?
Or all those 50% price hikes lately?
To me all this looks like unprovoked economic suicide. Even in a yes-company, there must be some manager with basic economic knowledge and/or common sense.

I do-- those things are generally not real. "50% price hikes" are a myth. Many armies literally now cost less than they did in 2004. Internet naysayers aside, GW is doing very well. Most people don't have the full picture and even those that claim to are often looking at things through a very biased lens.

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

Out of idle curiosity, how do you substantiate that armies cost less than in 2004? Do you mean per point? Because that's a fallacy of logic. Otherwise, I'd be interested to see the math on it.

Here's what I used in a recent small game of 40k:

1x Space Marine Librarian (10 USD in 2004, 16 USD now)
2x 10 Space Marine Tactical Marines, including plasma gun and missile launcher (80 USD total in 2004 (as two special weapons blisters are required to get the plasma guns), 74.50 total USD now)
1x 10 Space Marine Scouts with bolters (48 USD total in 2004, 50 USD total now)
2x Space Marine Rhino (60 USD total in 2004, 74.50 USD total now)
2x Space Marine Vindicator (80 USD total in 2004, 105.50 USD total now)

The cost to make this army in July 2004 would be 278 USD. The cost to make this army now would be 320.50 USD. However, when you adjust for inflation, 278 USD in 2004 turns out to be worth 337.38 in 2012-- so the actual cost to make the army went down over eight years! Further, several of the kits used are much better now than they were in 2004. In fact, every listed model except the Rhino is now a better sculpt, and often with more customizability than was available in 2004.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Hobbit Starter Box 50% more than LOTR Starter Box.
Dark Talon 66% more than Storm Talon (same 2 sprues, slightly modified).
Chaos Chariot 50% more than HE chariot (also with 2 different builds).
Throgg 66% more than comparable Ogre characters.
DA Land Speeder 100% more than same sized Land Speeder Storm.
All army books and Codices more than 100% more than previous edition at release.
Tell me these are all myth.
And I haven't yet started on Fantasy's new focus on big infantry units in 3000 point games.

Sure, you can point to examples where costs went up more than one might expect. But I could just as easily point to Command Squads, Devastators, Wyches, Immortals, Reaver Jetbikes, Scourges, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.-- all these units literally cost less money than they did in 2004 in absolute terms BEFORE accounting for inflation. Further, the newer models are better in all cases.

 Sidstyler wrote:
Personally I think PP charges what they do for their models because they saw GW doing it and thought they could get away with it, too.

Having visited PP facility in Seattle a while back I'd say their product is more expensive due to their entire manufacturing department being one giant clusterf***. That place looked a total confused mess. I've seen some pics of GW's UK factory as well, totally different work philosophy it looks like.

 Kingsley wrote:
Sure, you can point to examples where costs went up more than one might expect. But I could just as easily point to Command Squads, Devastators, Wyches, Immortals, Reaver Jetbikes, Scourges, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.-- all these units literally cost less money than they did in 2004 in absolute terms BEFORE accounting for inflation. Further, the newer models are better in all cases.

Every single one of those models doesn't exist any more and has been replaced with a plastic model.

On the other hand, plastic Cadians and Catachans are still the same kits as when they were first released, and cost double what they did when they first came out.

Actually, HBMC, they cost near enough triple...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
Sure, you can point to examples where costs went up more than one might expect. But I could just as easily point to Command Squads, Devastators, Wyches, Immortals, Reaver Jetbikes, Scourges, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.-- all these units literally cost less money than they did in 2004 in absolute terms BEFORE accounting for inflation. Further, the newer models are better in all cases.

Every single one of those models doesn't exist any more and has been replaced with a plastic model.

Right. That's... the point? All of the examples Kroothawk gave also compared new kits to old ones.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
On the other hand, plastic Cadians and Catachans are still the same kits as when they were first released, and cost double what they did when they first came out.

Yeah. Those are a bad deal, especially given the kit quality isn't very good. On the other hand, not all armies get screwed like that. Imperial Guard unfortunately seem to have received the short end of the stick there. I'm hoping the next Imperial Guard release comes with a redone basic trooper box, but I'm not exactly holding my breath...

And Tyranids. Don't forget that they got divided into two boxes from their old 1 Gaunt Box.

Things naturally go down when transitioning from metal to plastic (perfect example being 3 Metal Raveners or Killer Kanz vs the plastic 3-boxes we have now). But not everything does. When the plastic Termy box in 2nd Ed came out (around 2nd Ed Space Hulk) it was around AUD$2 (in mid 1990's money) less than the metal Terminator box. The plastic Dread kits have always been the same cost as the old metal Dread kits.

And we have all these new releases, from Hobbit through Dark Angels and now Warriors of Chaos and still you harp on about how some things have gone down. Throgg costs an insane amount of money. The new Elrond foot&mounted is just absurd. Codex/Army Book costs are far and above what a hard-cover book of that page-count should cost (FFG books, with more pages and better production values cost less). The Forsaken cost more than other similar units... just 'cause! The DA Termies cost more than regular Termies... just 'cause! And still you talk about Command Squads and Devastators like it's relevant.

Put down the Kool-Aid and open your eyes Kingsley. We're not imagining this trend, or exaggerating the impact or scope of the latest price increases.

The 10 man marine box also cost £10 when it was first released. That came with a missile launcher, basic sergeant and flamer.

Since then, it's had a couple of slight recuts, some added bling and an extra 5 individual weapons. Its current price is £23.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Scottywan82 wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Do you have any reasonable explanation, why GW keeps on making business decisions that have been proven to hurt their sales?
Or all those 50% price hikes lately?
To me all this looks like unprovoked economic suicide. Even in a yes-company, there must be some manager with basic economic knowledge and/or common sense.

I do-- those things are generally not real. "50% price hikes" are a myth. Many armies literally now cost less than they did in 2004. Internet naysayers aside, GW is doing very well. Most people don't have the full picture and even those that claim to are often looking at things through a very biased lens.

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

Out of idle curiosity, how do you substantiate that armies cost less than in 2004? Do you mean per point? Because that's a fallacy of logic. Otherwise, I'd be interested to see the math on it.

Here's what I used in a recent small game of 40k:

1x Space Marine Librarian (10 USD in 2004, 16 USD now)
2x 10 Space Marine Tactical Marines, including plasma gun and missile launcher (80 USD total in 2004 (as two special weapons blisters are required to get the plasma guns), 74.50 total USD now)
1x 10 Space Marine Scouts with bolters (48 USD total in 2004, 50 USD total now)
2x Space Marine Rhino (60 USD total in 2004, 74.50 USD total now)
2x Space Marine Vindicator (80 USD total in 2004, 105.50 USD total now)

The cost to make this army in July 2004 would be 278 USD. The cost to make this army now would be 320.50 USD. However, when you adjust for inflation, 278 USD in 2004 turns out to be worth 337.38 in 2012-- so the actual cost to make the army went down over eight years! Further, several of the kits used are much better now than they were in 2004. In fact, every listed model except the Rhino is now a better sculpt, and often with more customizability than was available in 2004.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Hobbit Starter Box 50% more than LOTR Starter Box.
Dark Talon 66% more than Storm Talon (same 2 sprues, slightly modified).
Chaos Chariot 50% more than HE chariot (also with 2 different builds).
Throgg 66% more than comparable Ogre characters.
DA Land Speeder 100% more than same sized Land Speeder Storm.
All army books and Codices more than 100% more than previous edition at release.
Tell me these are all myth.
And I haven't yet started on Fantasy's new focus on big infantry units in 3000 point games.

Sure, you can point to examples where costs went up more than one might expect. But I could just as easily point to Command Squads, Devastators, Wyches, Immortals, Reaver Jetbikes, Scourges, Grey Knight Terminators, etc.-- all these units literally cost less money than they did in 2004 in absolute terms BEFORE accounting for inflation. Further, the newer models are better in all cases.

Yes, but it almost all situations those models went from metal --> plastic. You can't make a straight cost analysis. The models are cheaper to produce now. Now to mention your tactical marine situation you end up with 12 marines, including an extra special weapon guy.

If you want to make valid comparisons, compare the first plastic kits to the current plastic kits.

Then come back and tell us how "cheap" armies became.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And we have all these new releases, from Hobbit through Dark Angels and now Warriors of Chaos and still you harp on about how some things have gone down. Throgg costs an insane amount of money. The new Elrond foot&mounted is just absurd. Codex/Army Book costs are far and above what a hard-cover book of that page-count should cost (FFG books, with more pages and better production values cost less). And still you talk about Command Squads and Devastators like it's relevant.

Looking at the new releases, I see a general trend of prices going down on core units.

Dark Eldar had price drops across essentially the entire range and giant improvements to the model quality as well-- Wyches, Reavers, Scourges, Warriors (once you factor in specials/heavies), Raiders, Ravagers, Talos, Hellions...

Necrons also came with price drops, with reduced prices for Immortals, Pariahs (now Lychguard), and Flayed Ones (yeah, they suck, but...).

Grey Knights brought price drops on both Grey Knight Terminators and Grey Knights in power armor and opened a huge range of options for both relative to the old metal models.

Chaos Space Marines had fewer core troop kits being redone, but the one that did (Raptors) got a price drop, better models, and more options.

Dark Angels do have a mild price increase on their Terminators, but perhaps that is because they have far more bitz than any other Terminator kit ever made? I agree that the Nephilim/Dark Talon and LSV/Darkshroud seem overpriced, but see those kits as outliers. The Ravenwing Command Squad went down in price when you consider what you would have had to convert to get those bitz previously.

I predict that the next army to get a big revamp-- probably the Sisters of Battle-- will see similar price drops.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Put down the Kool-Aid and open your eyes Kingsley. We're not imagining this trend, or inflating these prices. GW is.

GW inflates some prices and reduces others. Their general business model for 40k at present seems to be to reduce or keep relatively stable the prices on core units, while increasing the prices on big centerpiece models and characters. That's fine by me-- most of the army is made up of core units, after all! I don't mind paying high prices for a single model.

I'm not very interested in talking about the relative merits of GW and FFG books with someone who works for FFG, so let's just say our opinions diverge there.

i hope they get rid of Finecast, because i would actually like to start collecting GW models again...
i have not bought a single Finecast mini...
i have wanted at least half of the characters that have been released, but the material is a no go for me...
i would have bought them if they had used Forgeworld resin...

i like resin, metal, and plastic...
what i don't like, is not being able to depend on a quality product...
at least with plastic kits i know that i will get a mini i can work with, and not have to fly 1000 miles to L.A. to try and get a replacement...

cheers
jah

 Kingsley wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And we have all these new releases, from Hobbit through Dark Angels and now Warriors of Chaos and still you harp on about how some things have gone down. Throgg costs an insane amount of money. The new Elrond foot&mounted is just absurd. Codex/Army Book costs are far and above what a hard-cover book of that page-count should cost (FFG books, with more pages and better production values cost less). And still you talk about Command Squads and Devastators like it's relevant.

Looking at the new releases, I see a general trend of prices going down on core units.

Dark Eldar had price drops across essentially the entire range and giant improvements to the model quality as well-- Wyches, Reavers, Scourges, Warriors (once you factor in specials/heavies), Raiders, Ravagers, Talos, Hellions...

Necrons also came with price drops, with reduced prices for Immortals, Pariahs (now Lychguard), and Flayed Ones (yeah, they suck, but...).

Grey Knights brought price drops on both Grey Knight Terminators and Grey Knights in power armor and opened a huge range of options for both relative to the old metal models.

Chaos Space Marines had fewer core troop kits being redone, but the one that did (Raptors) got a price drop, better models, and more options.

Dark Angels do have a mild price increase on their Terminators, but perhaps that is because they have far more bitz than any other Terminator kit ever made? I agree that the Nephilim/Dark Talon and LSV/Darkshroud seem overpriced, but see those kits as outliers. The Ravenwing Command Squad went down in price when you consider what you would have had to convert to get those bitz previously.

I predict that the next army to get a big revamp-- probably the Sisters of Battle-- will see similar price drops.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Put down the Kool-Aid and open your eyes Kingsley. We're not imagining this trend, or inflating these prices. GW is.

GW inflates some prices and reduces others. Their general business model for 40k at present seems to be to reduce or keep relatively stable the prices on core units, while increasing the prices on big centerpiece models and characters. That's fine by me-- most of the army is made up of core units, after all! I don't mind paying high prices for a single model.

I'm not very interested in talking about the relative merits of GW and FFG books with someone who works for FFG, so let's just say our opinions diverge there.

There is a difference between lowering the price and releasing an entirely new kit in plastic. Comparing plastics to plastics on a model by model basis (so no claiming it is the same price because you would have had to go get a blister to get that special weapon) things have only gone up and up and up.

 jonolikespie wrote:
There is a difference between lowering the price and releasing an entirely new kit in plastic. Comparing plastics to plastics on a model by model basis (so no claiming it is the same price because you would have had to go get a blister to get that special weapon) things have only gone up and up and up.

Sure, but the way I see it, the reasonable thing to do is to compare what an army-- as an army-- actually cost in the past and what it costs now. That way we remove any bias due to liking one type of kit or material over another and end up with how much it would actually cost to make the army, then and now. This also helps get a more complete picture than cherrypicking units that support one claim or the other. Personally, I found that my prices went down. I bet for some people (foot IG) their prices will have gone up. But certainly the general claim of "GW is constantly hiking prices" seems to fall down when sometimes prices drop after eight and a half years of purported hikes, even if every army doesn't benefit the same.

 Kingsley wrote:
but the way I see it

I found your problem.

 Kingsley wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
There is a difference between lowering the price and releasing an entirely new kit in plastic. Comparing plastics to plastics on a model by model basis (so no claiming it is the same price because you would have had to go get a blister to get that special weapon) things have only gone up and up and up.

Sure, but the way I see it, the reasonable thing to do is to compare what an army-- as an army-- actually cost in the past and what it costs now. That way we remove any bias due to liking one type of kit or material over another and end up with how much it would actually cost to make the army, then and now. This also helps get a more complete picture than cherrypicking units that support one claim or the other. Personally, I found that my prices went down. I bet for some people (foot IG) their prices will have gone up. But certainly the general claim of "GW is constantly hiking prices" seems to fall down when sometimes prices drop after eight and a half years of purported hikes, even if every army doesn't benefit the same.

Alright, DE, GKs, Necron imomortals and paraias, chaos raptors, and all those other things were metal. Yes, the price did go down now they they are plastic but what else is left in the line (other than SoB) that need to be converted over? Prices drop when something becomes plastic (most of the time, the HE white lions and phoenix guard only dropped a couple of bucks IIRC) but now that pretty much everything is plastic or finecast we are not going to see any price drops in the future.
DEs, GKs and Necorns did all go down overall (I assume, I haven't done the numbers) because they were all incredibly old, mostly metal, ranges. There is nowhere left to go but up.

 Kroothawk wrote:

To me all this looks like unprovoked economic suicide. Even in a yes-company, there must be some manager with basic economic knowledge and/or common sense.

They fire those. I think you said it yourself when you mentioned something about golden parachutes and cashing in on stock options, lol.

They have a new business model, and it doesn't involve you. In fact, it doesn't involve Games Workshop. It involves precisely the people that would be responsible for maintaining a sustainable company, and no one else.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
but the way I see it

I found your problem.

Translation: My anecdotal evidence is right and your anecdotal evidence is wrong.

So in your world you can be correct but that doesn't make everyone else wrong or prove the overall arguement wrong.

I could just as easily say something like; My Dantewing Army cost is 1000% more than it used to be in 1989.

I would be just as correct at you.

Edited due to misunderstanding.

The quote you were responding to was arguing that we should compare pricing based on anecdotes.

So TalonZahn's objection was ironic.

 Ahtman wrote:
Trying to take the high road doesn't work nearly as well when you can't tell an obvious joke from an argument. It is nice that you know what the word 'anecdotal' is, and what the word 'evidence' is, now you just need to learn what they mean and how to actually apply them. If you did, you would realize neither were evidence, and at best Kingsleys was anecdotal, but that would be pushing it considering the limited context of the truncated quote.

Your quote wasn't supposed to be in there, just his.

All his evidence is based off an anecdote he presented.

You can work the math from there.

I'm not sure what kind of math Kingsley is doing... GW raises their prices far and above inflation rates.

Yes, some kits get a lot cheaper when they finally make it to plastic and you end up getting 3-5 when you used to have to buy one at a time.

But have you seen the price of mega-armored Nobz in finecast? Holy shEEt!

Not to mention GW production costs are going down. They are getting more efficient. So prices should be DROPPING ACROSS THE BOARD!

How does a kit that has been in production for several years suddenly cost 15-20 dollars more to make? It doesn't. They are just greedy sonsabitches.

 SickSix wrote:
I'm not sure what kind of math Kingsley is doing... GW raises their prices far and above inflation rates.

I'm looking at the actual prices from 2004 and making comparisons.

 SickSix wrote:
Yes, some kits get a lot cheaper when they finally make it to plastic and you end up getting 3-5 when you used to have to buy one at a time.

You'll notice that none of the things in the list that I compared prices for were metal to plastic conversions, and yet prices still went down when adjusted for inflation.

 SickSix wrote:
But have you seen the price of mega-armored Nobz in finecast? Holy shEEt!

Some things go up, some things go down. So it goes.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Alright, DE, GKs, Necron imomortals and paraias, chaos raptors, and all those other things were metal. Yes, the price did go down now they they are plastic but what else is left in the line (other than SoB) that need to be converted over? Prices drop when something becomes plastic (most of the time, the HE white lions and phoenix guard only dropped a couple of bucks IIRC) but now that pretty much everything is plastic or finecast we are not going to see any price drops in the future.
DEs, GKs and Necorns did all go down overall (I assume, I haven't done the numbers) because they were all incredibly old, mostly metal, ranges. There is nowhere left to go but up.

Aside from the entire Sisters of Battle range, there are a lot of Finecast sets that I think might see plastic conversions in the future. We'll see what happens as new releases arrive...

I edited my post so you probably didn't see these comments:
Not to mention GW production costs are going down. They are getting more efficient. So prices should be DROPPING ACROSS THE BOARD!

How does a kit that has been in production for several years suddenly cost 15-20 dollars more to make? It doesn't. They are just greedy sonsabitches.


Also, you aren't even factoring in the state of the global economies in 2004 and now. in 2004 a lot more people had disposable income. Now, a lot more people are having to save up just to buy one kit. And with the prices of EXISTING plastics skyrocketing, more and more are being forced out.

If you throw out metal to plastic conversions, there is just no way you can buying GW armies is getting cheaper.

 SickSix wrote:
Not to mention GW production costs are going down. They are getting more efficient. So prices should be DROPPING ACROSS THE BOARD!

"Should" is a dangerous thing to say. GW certainly could pass production cost reductions on to the consumer, but they are by no means obligated to. Remember that GW wants to price to what the market can bear and will raise prices until enough people stop buying that they start losing money. If you think prices are already too high, stop buying, but don't get mad at other people if they think the situation is fine, nor at GW for attempting to make more money.

 SickSix wrote:
Also, you aren't even factoring in the state of the global economies in 2004 and now. in 2004 a lot more people had disposable income. Now, a lot more people are having to save up just to buy one kit. And with the prices of EXISTING plastics skyrocketing, more and more are being forced out.

This is very hard to evaluate objectively.

 SickSix wrote:
If you throw out metal to plastic conversions, there is just no way you can buying GW armies is getting cheaper.

Except that I actually did the math on models that didn't involve any metal-to-plastic conversions (the Scouts went to plastic but didn't cost substantially less), and the overall price of the army I was looking at had in fact gone down from 2004 to 2013 once you adjusted for inflation. Let me repeat that:

If I bought the army I was looking at in 2004, I would pay more money for worse models than I would if I bought the same army in 2012. So for me, price has gone down and quality has gone up.

Kingsley wrote:I'm not very interested in talking about the relative merits of GW and FFG books with someone who works for FFG, so let's just say our opinions diverge there.

Nice try, but you don't get to dodge this one so easily.

Take Total War, the core rulebook for BattleTech (or any of the main hard-back rulebooks). Now none of these books have the same level of artwork as a GW or FFG book (and for the record, I wasn't just talking about FFG's 40K RPGs, I was talking about their production values in general), as they instead do a lot of miniature photography, but even so these core rulebooks are 400+ page affairs, in full colour, and cost less than a GW Codex.

You going to sit there with a straight face and tell me the Codex/Army Prices that GW charge are reasonable?

 Kingsley wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Do you have any reasonable explanation, why GW keeps on making business decisions that have been proven to hurt their sales?
Or all those 50% price hikes lately?
To me all this looks like unprovoked economic suicide. Even in a yes-company, there must be some manager with basic economic knowledge and/or common sense.

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

A Golden Age? Really? The rules are a +0.1 development of previous editions, the new flyers and giant plastic kits (which the rules encourage to buy) are of extremely questionable aesthetic value, and their is almost nothing innovative amongst new releases with new model releases a mix of re-runs of stuff available 15 years ago and those aforementioned Tomix Toy-like plastic kits. And to cap it all it is massively expensive - a 'Golden Age' would hardly see long term players of the game driven away from it in such numbers.

 Kingsley wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
There is a difference between lowering the price and releasing an entirely new kit in plastic. Comparing plastics to plastics on a model by model basis (so no claiming it is the same price because you would have had to go get a blister to get that special weapon) things have only gone up and up and up.

Sure, but the way I see it, the reasonable thing to do is to compare what an army-- as an army-- actually cost in the past and what it costs now. That way we remove any bias due to liking one type of kit or material over another and end up with how much it would actually cost to make the army, then and now. This also helps get a more complete picture than cherrypicking units that support one claim or the other. Personally, I found that my prices went down. I bet for some people (foot IG) their prices will have gone up. But certainly the general claim of "GW is constantly hiking prices" seems to fall down when sometimes prices drop after eight and a half years of purported hikes, even if every army doesn't benefit the same.

Are you seriously arguing that despite changing to a material that is far cheaper to produce, GW still maintains the same price level or got "cheaper" compared to using metal?

That's about as irrational as you can possibly be. What if GW suddenly sold papercraft armies at the price of plastic models? Would you happily embrace that too, stating that GW always maintans their prices?

 Kroothawk wrote:

Throgg 66% more than comparable Ogre characters.
DA Land Speeder 100% more than same sized Land Speeder Storm.
All army books and Codices more than 100% more than previous edition at release.
Tell me these are all myth.

While I think above examples are overpriced, exaggaration or outright lying does your cause no good. Throgg is much bigger than those Ogre characters, DA Land Speeder is much bigger than Storm, Codices are not "100% more expensive" and much better print quality than old books.

In fairness to GW, some stuff does go down in price. When I started the game three years ago, single Ork Killa Kan costed 30 euros. Now you get three for 36 euros, and they have better options than the old kit.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kingsley wrote:I'm not very interested in talking about the relative merits of GW and FFG books with someone who works for FFG, so let's just say our opinions diverge there.

Nice try, but you don't get to dodge this one so easily.

Take Total War, the core rulebook for BattleTech (or any of the main hard-back rulebooks). Now none of these books have the same level of artwork as a GW or FFG book (and for the record, I wasn't just talking about FFG's 40K RPGs, I was talking about their production values in general), as they instead do a lot of miniature photography, but even so these core rulebooks are 400+ page affairs, in full colour, and cost less than a GW Codex.

You going to sit there with a straight face and tell me the Codex/Army Prices that GW charge are reasonable?

The only FFG book that I own is the Dark Heresy core rulebook. I considered this book worth what I paid for it-- slightly over 50 USD IIRC. I also consider GWs new full-color Codexes to be worth it at about the same price. The Dark Heresy book obviously has much more rules content. Most of the Dark Heresy book is rules and I believe it is 3-4x as long as one of the new Codexes. However the new Codexes strike me as much stronger from a visual design and artwork perspective. This is apparent even from a look at the covers of the respective books and continues throughout.

As rulebooks, FFG's books definitely provide more bang for the buck. In terms of artwork, fluff, design, etc. GW's Codexes strike me as far superior. Overall, I consider both products to be worth it and will happily pay full price for GW's next Codex for an army I play. I will also pay full price for FFG's Dark Heresy expansions if they strike my fancy. I do think GW may be making a mistake in raising the quality (and cost) of Codexes to the level that they have, in that I used to buy most Codexes and now only anticipate buying Codexes for armies that I actually play, as I think the new Codexes-- while beautiful-- are too expensive to be bought only on the merits of their fluff and art. If Codexes sold for 30 USD, I would probably buy every new book GW put out.

However, this may be mitigated by the increased prices-- I'm not sure how many people in GW's core audience actually bought every book, but suspect it was not high. We'll see how this move plays out.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I'm a big proponent of just going back to metal. It was the best of all the worlds, for detail, price and strength, and had few downsides. There has never been a single (normal) figure in the nearly 20 years I've been collecting and painting 40K (not counting large, multi-part monsters) that I ever had a lick of trouble with in metal, where what I've seen of Finecast has scared me off ever, ever buying a single model in that material, and I refuse to pay even more than metal models for those in a medium whose entire reason for being was because the high price of metal made it a cheaper medium to work in!

I understand that Finecast is actually more expensive for GW to produce than metal, even though material is cheaper.

I don't quite understand metal nostalgy. I've seen plenty of problems in metal miniatures, usually things which are supposed to be straight, are horribly twisted when cast in metal (Broadside weapons, BFG ships). I don't know if they'd be better in Finecast, mind you, but they can hardly be worse. Putting together multi-part metal models is a horror and their weight often makes them awkward, particularly if the models are tall. OK, metal does have some upsides: it's more durable to some degree, paint is easy to strip off, and you certainly feel you get "more" for the price because of the weight.

Pacific wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

A Golden Age? Really? The rules are a +0.1 development of previous editions, the new flyers and giant plastic kits (which the rules encourage to buy) are of extremely questionable aesthetic value, and their is almost nothing innovative amongst new releases with new model releases a mix of re-runs of stuff available 15 years ago and those aforementioned Tomix Toy-like plastic kits. And to cap it all it is massively expensive - a 'Golden Age' would hardly see long term players of the game driven away from it in such numbers.

6th edition 40k is the strongest edition yet rules-wise. You claim that the rules are designed to sell new flyers and giant plastic kits, but this rings false to me. I'm a fairly experienced player. The current rules seem fairly troop-focused to me and many people have abandoned vehicles entirely, while these large (and expensive) kits used to be extremely common in 5th edition. For instance, the Dark Angels recently came out and indeed featured new flyers (though no "giant plastic kits")-- which are generally considered bad and few people seem to be fielding them! I have yet to see either of the new Dark Angel flyers on the tabletop.

It seems monumentally confused to say the Deathwing Knights/Command Squad/Terminators set are "re-runs of stuff available 15 years ago." To me this kit seems to unambiguously be the best Terminator set ever made. Similarly, a quick look at Dark Vengeance-- GW's cheap snap-together starter set offering-- seems to disprove the claim that there is "almost nothing innovative" being produced by GW. This set is perhaps the best 40k starter yet and is extremely innovative in terms of both æsthetics and physical production/design.

Is GW's design team perfect? No. I'll be the first one to point out that the new Chaos Space Marine Mutilators, for instance, are trash. But saying that GW's kits are "Tomix Toy-like" fails the laugh test for me.

Sigvatr wrote:Are you seriously arguing that despite changing to a material that is far cheaper to produce, GW still maintains the same price level or got "cheaper" compared to using metal?

Er, weren't you the same person who said "I have no idea why people consider metal superior. I absolutely HATE metal miniatures. I convert so many models and metal is a major pita to model, paint keeps going off, it doesn't look as detailed as Finecast does etc?"

I consider most metal to plastic conversions to produce better model quality for cheaper. I also don't care what things cost GW, I care what they cost me. If GW now sells the Immortals that used to cost me 10 USD for 1 bland metal figure in a box of 5 plastic figures for 35 USD with superior detail, posability, and bitz, I consider that an unambiguous win for me as a consumer.

Further, the army that I cited as having gotten cheaper did not include any of the kits (like Command Squads, Devastators, Wyches, Immortals, etc.) that got cheaper for the consumer based on material switches. I could have produced a more dramatic effect by cherry-picking in this fashion, but instead I just looked at what I had most recently used. There are two reasons that this force is cheaper now than it was in 2004-- first, GW has been packing more bitz into their kits, preventing you from having to buy separate models in blisters in order to get some options. Second, prices really haven't increased that much over inflation across the catalog as a whole.

 Kingsley wrote:

As rulebooks, FFG's books definitely provide more bang for the buck. In terms of artwork, fluff, design, etc. GW's Codexes strike me as far superior. Overall, I consider both products to be worth it and will happily pay full price for GW's next Codex for an army I play. I will also pay full price for FFG's Dark Heresy expansions if they strike my fancy. I do think GW may be making a mistake in raising the quality (and cost) of Codexes to the level that they have, in that I used to buy most Codexes and now only anticipate buying Codexes for armies that I actually play, as I think the new Codexes-- while beautiful-- are too expensive to be bought only on the merits of their fluff and art. If Codexes sold for 30 USD, I would probably buy every new book GW put out.

However, this may be mitigated by the increased prices-- I'm not sure how many people in GW's core audience actually bought every book, but suspect it was not high. We'll see how this move plays out.

Problem there is that Codex is necessary for starting an army, and rising codex prices increase entry cost. For me, estabilished player, a cost of new Codex for my existing army is not a big deal and I'm actually happy to pay more if I get better looking, more durable book. However, some people used to buy Codecii just for the heck of it, to stay in touch with things and who knows, well-written codex might inspire some of them to start a new army. But if the books are so expensive that only dedicated followers buy them, that is potential loss for GW even if they make same money from actual sales.

So though I don't mind new, more expensive army books, I can see that it could be an issue. I think GW should offer "mini-books" in similar vein to mini-rulebooks in starter set. Put them in Battleforces or something and charge extra $10 or so.

Backfire wrote:
Problem there is that Codex is necessary for starting an army, and rising codex prices increase entry cost. For me, estabilished player, a cost of new Codex for my existing army is not a big deal and I'm actually happy to pay more if I get better looking, more durable book. However, some people used to buy Codecii just for the heck of it, to stay in touch with things and who knows, well-written codex might inspire some of them to start a new army. But if the books are so expensive that only dedicated followers buy them, that is potential loss for GW even if they make same money from actual sales.

So though I don't mind new, more expensive army books, I can see that it could be an issue. I think GW should offer "mini-books" in similar vein to mini-rulebooks in starter set. Put them in Battleforces or something and charge extra $10 or so.

I agree with this post completely.

I didn't chose random examples, I chose starters and Codices in addition to some other stuff from the last 3 months, where GW made those 50% price hike.
I agree that there are some old boxes that had other prices, but we are talking about December to February prices that went though the roof.

On the subject of books i do find the massive rule books to be a bit excessive, i am tempted to get back into fantasy but the rule book is £45, which i wouldnt mind but its the size of the thing, like the 40k book i got the dark vengence set as its easier to just have the smaller version.

So to get that i would need to buy island of blood, and as i want to start WoC i would have no need for the skaven and high elves, but i could ebay a copy of the rulebook.

The cost of codexes and army books isnt as bad as it could be, i bought a warmachine rule book, it was £30, softbound, full colour, the GW book is about 1/3 larger, and higher quality paper, but is £15 dearer, however the warmachine book is simpler to lug about, the GW book collects dust.

So if GW offered a slimmer rules only rule book (hard or soft bound) at say £15 that would be really good for people just updating, as it would cost GW little as its just printing the rules section again. But this would mean their £45 big rule books would stack up, the argument then is, cut production to less volume.

I am always first to stand by GW as i love the models and have a lot of good times with the staff and it gives me enjoyment, however i am not blind to the fact its never going to be cheap, but its more of a long burn hobby than it was 8 years ago where you could buy an army in one go, now it takes more thought to spread that cost.

I don't quite understand metal nostalgy. I've seen plenty of problems in metal miniatures, usually things which are supposed to be straight, are horribly twisted when cast in metal (Broadside weapons, BFG ships). I don't know if they'd be better in Finecast, mind you, but they can hardly be worse. Putting together multi-part metal models is a horror and their weight often makes them awkward, particularly if the models are tall. OK, metal does have some upsides: it's more durable to some degree, paint is easy to strip off, and you certainly feel you get "more" for the price because of the weight.

See, I'm on the other side. I don't get how metal models, even 40mm based ones, were so freaking monumentally hard to put together and prep. I can't think of a model where I had to do more than scrape some mold lines with a knife and then superglue them together. Even most of my pinning of metal models was during conversions, rather than stock models.

Every time I have looked at a Finecast model in my LGS, I saw a model that would need more cleaning than if it was out of metal (indeed, some of them are Finecast versions of metal models I previously bought years ago), and with small, thin pieces that not only are as much or more warped as most small metal pieces would be of the same size, but are harder to straighten out and of a material more likely to break. And i can;t remember a metal model with as many pitting issues as Finecast.

For instance, my two Necron Lords variants that are metal have been made in Finecast, and while they came out of the blister with no mold lines and slightly bent staves, I wouldn't pick up the Finecast versions if you actually paid me the blister price, because I'd still have to deal with their pitting and easily broken weapons that look like spaghetti in the package. I saw one that looked like a Shepard's crook- talk about them being Tomb Kings in space, aright!

I don't get it either. Bent (or "horribly twisted") weapons and other parts can be fixed rather easily: you bend them back. You don't even need to heat up and soften the material, just use your fingers and carefully bend it back into place. I did that for all my incubi weapons when I opened the boxes and they're all straight now.

Yeah, if you keep bending them back and forth the metal will weaken and eventually break, but don't be a dumbass and sit there bending it back and forth thinking "Nothing bad could possibly happen if I do this!", just fix them the one time and they should be fine, so long as you have some common sense when handling your precious, ludicrously-expensive models during gaming and don't constantly knock them over or throw them around thinking they're indestructible (or in anger because they performed badly). Sometimes parts can be problematic, like the broadside railguns, but that's more or less GW's fault for designing them that way in the first place and/or poor QC. I fixed mine by getting a pair of tiny needle-nose pliers in between the gaps and spreading them out that way, and then filing/sanding/using GS on any damage that I caused, if any. Funny thing is I would still prefer that any day over buying the same parts in Finecast and getting weapons that can't be fixed, because the material has memory and it reverts back to the bent shape it was originally in when purchased, if it doesn't just snap entirely because it's made of brittle resin. I've found that sometimes Finecast parts are bendy and sometimes they're surprisingly easy to break, guess it all depends on the mix.

 Kingsley wrote:


Er, weren't you the same person who said "I have no idea why people consider metal superior. I absolutely HATE metal miniatures. I convert so many models and metal is a major pita to model, paint keeps going off, it doesn't look as detailed as Finecast does etc?"

Precisely. You can't use the same argument in every case though and that's where your argumentation falls short. I do agree, however, to some point. Having a look at older WD shows that a lot of stuff is roughly the same price as before, maybe 2-3€ more expensive, but considering inflation etc. that's fine. The thing are those major price hikes, especially the one that's ahead of us now - just have a look at the ridiculous price increases in the LotR range, Kingsley, and compare the current boxes to those from ~3 years ago. Terminators now are ~1/3 more expensive and let's not even start talking about the 50€ (!) Throgg model. A single model is roughly 1/3 of what my entire 2.5k army cost me.

I'll be interested to see if there are in fact giant price hikes in the near future. I'm inclined to believe that there won't be, but time will tell. I think Throgg is an outlier and that prices are not going to go anywhere near there for normal models. We'll see what happens in the future.

I will say that there has never been a better or easier time to quit 40k, what with the popularity of many alternate game systems, promising Kickstarters, and so on, so GW had better step carefully...

 Sidstyler wrote:
I don't get it either. Bent (or "horribly twisted") weapons and other parts can be fixed rather easily: you bend them back. You don't even need to heat up and soften the material, just use your fingers and carefully bend it back into place. I did that for all my incubi weapons when I opened the boxes and they're all straight now.

I'm not talking about easily fixable stuff like that. I'm talking about deformations over entire model. For example here: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1YW7aQl1p-4/Tb8V6q4OwtI/AAAAAAAAAC0/vUQ7J8n9k7g/s1600/IMG_3360.JPG

As for putting metal minis together, some minis have very small surfaces which have to be glued together: superglue is not strong enough there. I just painted a Kroot Shaper, which has this problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kroothawk wrote:
I didn't chose random examples, I chose starters and Codices in addition to some other stuff from the last 3 months, where GW made those 50% price hike.
I agree that there are some old boxes that had other prices, but we are talking about December to February prices that went though the roof.

Well technically, those aren't price hikes, since they're new releases which did not have price before

Da Boss wrote:
Man. I've always found Mikhaila to be one of the most level headed posters with regard to GW. If he's posting stuff like this, then that really is a bad sign!

Definitely, the fethers in charge at GW really must have gak for brains if Miks started dripping as well.

 Kingsley wrote:
I'll be interested to see if there are in fact giant price hikes in the near future. I'm inclined to believe that there won't be, but time will tell. I think Throgg is an outlier and that prices are not going to go anywhere near there for normal models. We'll see what happens in the future.

I will say that there has never been a better or easier time to quit 40k, what with the popularity of many alternate game systems, promising Kickstarters, and so on, so GW had better step carefully...

Plastic Forsaken are another good example. They are standard 25mm infantry. A box of 12 Chaos Warriors costs 30€ (2,5€ / miniature). A box of 10 Forsaken costs 40€ (4€ / miniature). That's a difference of 63%.

The chariot went from 26€ to 35€. That's an increase of 25%.

Individual character models went up from ~15€ to 20€. Another increase of 33%.

And again, you did not reply to the LotR changes. Let me fill you in on the details.

Until Dec 2010, each box had 24 models and cost 15,50€.

The new infantry box now has 12 models and costs 30€.

That's a price increase of almost 200 (TWOHUNDRED) %.

It's beyond my rational thinking how one can justify those price increases.

Throgg is not an outliner. Just check the new line.

I don't know why people are saying how resin is terrible, resin isn't bad at all. FineCost is terrible, but I blame that on the manufacturer more than I blame the medium. I've used resin in other models and it looks just as good or better than many plastic ones, and always better than the metal counterparts.

For me, I'll never understand the love of metal from a painter's perspective. The detail is simply not there in comparison to plastic or resin, It needs to be pinned everywhere to hold, weighs a ton, but it strips paint really well. I understand the collector's value, but that comes more from metal not being around anymore.

My experience with finecost has met with decent results. I've only seen 2 models so far that came with horrible flaws. One chaplain with jump pack that had the texture of gravel all over him. (someone didnt prep the mold i guess) and a necron IC that had a few holes. Maybe my FLGS gets only good blisters of the stuff, but the net makes it sound like I won the lottery on finecast models. still I think its an inferior resin cast to PP

I would love to see finecast end, but unfortunatly I can't see it happening, because, GW has been clever in 1 aspect of the whle FC business. They have used it to make the models people need, you want a FUNKY/SPIKEY chaos general here you go,you want that elite unit for your army there you go. Which if like me I make myself from bits, but other less skilled modellers have no choice to buy. The same is with BIG models in Warhammer and flyers in 40K,both are needed to make armies competitive and so they charge more for them and use the rules to make them essential buying. This is especially true with flyers in 40K, if you want to go to competitions you'd better get those 3 Vendettas/Stormtalons/Helldrakes or some equally expensive AA or you might as well not turn up. This is because several years ago GW worked out how to do bigger plastic mould cheaper so they are now part of every army.

Now I'm not a GW hater, I've been playing Warhammer and 40K since they came out and I will continue to play them both, but I can't see myself buying a new army I the near future, but unfortunatly ladies and gentlemen, GW doesn't care, not about me or you, no more than anyother big company. They will reduce their costs, increase their prices and keep selling their products, because they have a target market and we are not it

As a final point about how GW compares to other companies, GW works about 2 years in advance as do PP, which generally means they have plenty of time to sort issues. When PP launched their plastic/resin jacks they actually delayed the realise, because there where issues with casting and they didn't release any until they got it right. Where as GW just went right ahead with FC with all its issues and problems, because they knew they could. You or I will check and its bad send it back/refund,but they don't say this in any GW store. So when little Johny buys that model or mummy and daddy spend a fortune at Xmas, they will not be offered to check the product first and so home it goes and they don't know any different. And if they do say anything they are told it happens and we can sell you some liquid green stuff and show you how to use it. So that the difference in customer care, but as I've said before we are not their target market and what you or I will except/believe is very different from the 'I want one generation'.

Think I'd better get off my soap box now.

Jeff

If Finecast was anywhere near the compound utilised in Forge World casts then I would be happy for resin to stay. As it stands, I am waiting with excited, jittering hands that GW will act on the mistake that is Finecast.

I have yet to receive one model in Finecast which I can say wholeheartedly is sculpted correctly. It has simply been a case of lowering your expectations though, where you seem to be happy with an occasional bubble you can fix rather than half of the body being missing or something. Finecast is without doubt the largest practical joke I have seen played by a legitimate business in a long time. Not only are the return rates through the roof, the name an oxymoron and the practical usage of it in a tabletop setting absolutely impossible to maintain, we are charged significantly more for the pleasure of this 'Premium Material'.

It's unacceptable to sell the crap and I dont care how GW want to dress it up, as long as they get rid of it. More kits like the Empire Battle Wizards would be more than acceptable for most of the community. Multi-part character kits in Plastic are consistent and allow for a great deal of beginner skill and up conversion.

Hopefully if the plastics become the standard, the prices for these absolutely shocking miniatures in Finecast will fall substantially.

Backfire wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I'm a big proponent of just going back to metal. It was the best of all the worlds, for detail, price and strength, and had few downsides. There has never been a single (normal) figure in the nearly 20 years I've been collecting and painting 40K (not counting large, multi-part monsters) that I ever had a lick of trouble with in metal, where what I've seen of Finecast has scared me off ever, ever buying a single model in that material, and I refuse to pay even more than metal models for those in a medium whose entire reason for being was because the high price of metal made it a cheaper medium to work in!

I understand that Finecast is actually more expensive for GW to produce than metal, even though material is cheaper.

I don't quite understand metal nostalgy. I've seen plenty of problems in metal miniatures, usually things which are supposed to be straight, are horribly twisted when cast in metal (Broadside weapons, BFG ships). I don't know if they'd be better in Finecast, mind you, but they can hardly be worse. Putting together multi-part metal models is a horror and their weight often makes them awkward, particularly if the models are tall. OK, metal does have some upsides: it's more durable to some degree, paint is easy to strip off, and you certainly feel you get "more" for the price because of the weight.

The weight is a fair descriptor of it.

But to say it would "Hardly be worse in finecast" tells me that you haven't seen this stuff in action, yet. Please go see it for yourself, then ask your questions again.

I'm not even going to get caught up in the other .... position that is being taken.

I can tell you for a fact that 3 stores that I used to play at have a fraction of a wall that was once covered with both 40K and fantasy. The tables in one particular store- 12 on a weekend, once had people standing around waiting for a game of 40K. There were at least 1 or two larger scale battles at least twice a month, and there was a good portion of hig end players that have gradually dwindled, if not moved off and found other places to play. Another store almost prided itself in the variety of figures that they had, and wend to hell and high water to try to get anything you needed. NOW?

They have what they have left, and if you really want GW, your going to have to order it yourself.

Thats not just playing around either. That is a fact.

Your saying "Golden Age"?

Thier real "Golden age" was in 94-95. This here now is the dawn of the dead.

Especailly with the outright hostility that is being generated by this company for the so called "Players" of thier games.

If you try any of this stuff in any other job, you can pretty much expect a lawsuit. Price gouging, shoddy products, not fulfilling orders, charging such high prices that they are borderline criminal, substandards throughout, If you did something like this in the service industry, health, or automechanics, you wouldn't last a month.

Even a used car salesman does better then GW has in the past two years in terms of service and support for thier products.

I'll throw it back out there that your talking metal prices for substandard material( finecast .plastic. resin, or whatever you want to call it.)
QAQC is nonexistent, and the prices that you cling to are not exactly across the board.

I was there, I paid the prices, they were reasonable, and you actually got something for your money.

A squad box of 16 guys was around 19 or 20 bucks. A tank was around 25-27. The blister packs were around 5-10 bucks. Metals, by the way for the blisters.

My fears for FineCast going MO-only have been fairly well-covered; if they start doing elites in plastic I worry they might be mono-pose similar to the characters. Fancy mono-pose a la Space Hulk wouldn't be awful, but I just don't see them doing multi-part for most kits. I can see a future where they just don't sell the non-core units in stores anymore so they can squeeze all the profit out of those SKUs just because that's the kind of stupidity they seem like to engage in anymore; maximize profits and to hell with any bridges we burn along the way.

On the topic of the material itself though, I do want to say I've bought a number of FC kits and I've not had any issues. I don't know if my FLGS has someone looking out for them at the warehouse, but other than ridiculous amounts of flash I've not had issues with distorted or miscast details. Even with the flash issue though, it's no worse than cleaning up GW's metals, which isn't meant as a compliment of FC so much as a "wtf?" with some of the GW metals I have. The store might have had the opposite luck with metal that they do with FC, but I typically spend much more time hunting down stray tabs and strings of metal than I've have to spend cleaning up FC.

I think the plan has always been for GW to get the whole range into plastic, and the character models in plastic that are starting to appear prove this to some extent.

Finecast has been a huge headache i think for GW, i like a few others have been quite lucky and usually had good casts, bar a necron IC whose staff was a bit thick, but it was easy to sort with a knife and patience.

However i have seen some shocking stuff, in saying that though GW has never said no to a replacement and my local GW always lets me open boxes and have a good look before i leave incase there is an issue, and they swap it, usually letting me keep the dodgy one for bits (BITS FOR THE BITS BOX!!....sorry).

One thing that is interesting me is that normally i buy in dribs n drabs as i collect stuff for 'projects' usually ebay fully painted armies, so i end up with a lot of spare stuff that i bundle together as an army to play with or sell.

Actually making up an army to play competetively is something i havent done for a few years, and the new fantasy chaos is making me want to sit and go through exactly what is needed to create a reasonably balanced playable army, what are the numbers of models needed since i last played, costs, how much in plastic or in finecast etc, it would be interesting to see how much i can get in plastic over FC, especially since my last fantasy army was wood elves, and the battalion box helped massively keeping everything plastic.

i am meeting my mate tonight (local GW manager) for a chinwag about the new stuff, so will be interesting to see if he has any tidbits regarding FC and how much it may get used or not as plastic takes over.

he may also have shiny things to show me, but i will resist

 Sidstyler wrote:
I don't get it either. Bent (or "horribly twisted") weapons and other parts can be fixed rather easily: you bend them back. You don't even need to heat up and soften the material, just use your fingers and carefully bend it back into place. I did that for all my incubi weapons when I opened the boxes and they're all straight now.

Well, Finecast is very easy to bend back. Just warm it up with some hot water and gently straighten it out. Simple, yet some people seem to think bent finecast is irredeemable (like the bent lightning claw blades in the Sternguard weapon kit). It's a lot trickier with metal. If it's something like a sword blade, no biggie, as you can probably indeed just gently bend it back. But if it's something like a Sternguard Bolter that is bent along the length of the weapon so that it is effectively "drooping", that's quite hard to bend back! In fact I'm not sure how to do it properly, can't grip it with enough strength to do it without tools, at least. And cleaning up casting lines etc from metal is a major pain compared to resin, obviously. The only good thing about metal that I can think of is that it's easier to strip off paint if there's a need to do that.

I bought about 14 kits of finecast in December, having bought none previously. Of those, Helbrecht and Emperor's Champion had broken sword hilts, Sword Brethren kit had two damaged weapons, Thunderfire Cannon was quite a mess (more to do with the mold rather than the individual casting, I reckon)... other kits had some minor flaws that I can more easily work around. Overall it wasn't as bad as I expected from all the horror stories, but still certainly more issues than there should be! Now I'm waiting for whether or not I'll get replacements for these.

 Grot 6 wrote:
Your saying "Golden Age"?

Thier real "Golden age" was in 94-95. This here now is the dawn of the dead.

I have not seen the level of enthusiasm and interest that I now see for Warhammer 40k since the LotR boom. I'm noticing more and more new people getting into the game, friends who haven't bought anything in a while getting excited about new releases, and so on. Fantasy, on the other hand, is much less popular locally and Warmahordes seems to have eaten a big chunk of its market-- indeed perhaps the lion's share.

 Grot 6 wrote:
Even a used car salesman does better then GW has in the past two years in terms of service and support for thier products.

Every time I have had a problem with a GW product they have outright given me a replacement product for free. I have a feeling that if I went to my local used car dealership and said "hey, that last car you sold me sucked, can I have another one?" I'd be laughed right out the door.

 mikhaila wrote:

Well, as some one that runs gaming stores and orders direct from GW, I can tell you this is pretty much already happening. Every week when I re-order, most of the finecast I need "Has been moved to direct". I have less and less GW product on my wall, for the simple reason GW won't sell it to me. They will graciously allow me to pay at a much higher rate, and get the product in generic white label packaging. Somehow, paying more for a badly packaged product hasn't worked well. I still do special orders, but quit trying to keep the whole line in stock.

My blister display is a fraction of what it used to be, and getting smaller. All new releases are temporary. For instance, I got Belial in with the new DA releases, and I already can't reorder him. Finecast is leaving all stores, both independent and GW.

GW used to have a clue. They encouraged stores to carry more stock, so they could sell more models. Now that they have cut what I can carry, they wonder why I'm selling less. I explain the same thing over and over. The higher ups don't care, lower level sales reps have no power.

Less GW on my wall = less sales of GW in the store = more of other peoples games I sell to make up with it.

Here speaks someone who managed to almost totally diffuse my bad opinion on GW over a couple of beers and some events in the past. Mikhaila is an excellent businessman and runs a gaming and comic store that should be held up as an example of 'how you should be doing it'. He sold a ton of GW stuff, even to experienced gamers coming to events, people already 'in the know' for ordering online.

Mike, first I read your response when GW pulled any support for tournaments and now I read this from you. It's a window into how GW are treating the indy stores and why when I asked the nearby geek shop here in Gloucester, he laughed and said 'no way will I deal with that company again'. The upper echelons just appear to have become so surrounded by yes men and a culture of absolute belief that they are piloting the ship directly into the beach with the expectation that the land will retreat before them.

This is a guy who absolutely loved the GW company, as an independent retailer, who explained to me the benefits they gave him, the quality of service and the good relationship they enjoyed. Yet here now is someone pissed with the company and already working out how best to protect his business and promote selling other lines over GW, his post should be being held up in board meetings inside the bunker and serious questions being leveled about the ramifications. There won't be, because the company's culture does not allow for self analysis or critical thinking.

It's like they are just going to push everything till it breaks and then...? Either retreat or sell off the IP and disappear. From the outside looking in, it's a madhouse.

Everytime, I hear the recent prices of GW products, I hear them in the voice of Chris Rock in his bullet control sketch

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 mikhaila wrote:

Well, as some one that runs gaming stores and orders direct from GW, I can tell you this is pretty much already happening. Every week when I re-order, most of the finecast I need "Has been moved to direct". I have less and less GW product on my wall, for the simple reason GW won't sell it to me. They will graciously allow me to pay at a much higher rate, and get the product in generic white label packaging. Somehow, paying more for a badly packaged product hasn't worked well. I still do special orders, but quit trying to keep the whole line in stock.

My blister display is a fraction of what it used to be, and getting smaller. All new releases are temporary. For instance, I got Belial in with the new DA releases, and I already can't reorder him. Finecast is leaving all stores, both independent and GW.

GW used to have a clue. They encouraged stores to carry more stock, so they could sell more models. Now that they have cut what I can carry, they wonder why I'm selling less. I explain the same thing over and over. The higher ups don't care, lower level sales reps have no power.

Less GW on my wall = less sales of GW in the store = more of other peoples games I sell to make up with it.

Here speaks someone who managed to almost totally diffuse my bad opinion on GW over a couple of beers and some events in the past. Mikhaila is an excellent businessman and runs a gaming and comic store that should be held up as an example of 'how you should be doing it'. He sold a ton of GW stuff, even to experienced gamers coming to events, people already 'in the know' for ordering online.

Mike, first I read your response when GW pulled any support for tournaments and now I read this from you. It's a window into how GW are treating the indy stores and why when I asked the nearby geek shop here in Gloucester, he laughed and said 'no way will I deal with that company again'. The upper echelons just appear to have become so surrounded by yes men and a culture of absolute belief that they are piloting the ship directly into the beach with the expectation that the land will retreat before them.

This is a guy who absolutely loved the GW company, as an independent retailer, who explained to me the benefits they gave him, the quality of service and the good relationship they enjoyed. Yet here now is someone pissed with the company and already working out how best to protect his business and promote selling other lines over GW, his post should be being held up in board meetings inside the bunker and serious questions being leveled about the ramifications. There won't be, because the company's culture does not allow for self analysis or critical thinking.

It's like they are just going to push everything till it breaks and then...? Either retreat or sell off the IP and disappear. From the outside looking in, it's a madhouse.

Starts slow clap.

I think you could pick almost anyone from DakkaDakka and they could run this company better.

 Kingsley wrote:

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

Its a golden age of 40K, but its not a golden age of GW. Far from it.

 angel of ecstasy wrote:
To me this sounds like a step in the right direction on the road to the rumoured transition to plastic. Now I've never dealt with Finecast, but from what I've heard plastic is preferable, and what people want.

It was only a rumor to those of you outside of GW manufacturing, when PT was in charge it was part of his plan to move as much as possible over to plastic.

I can't see how Finecast is a better product for GW, when they are having to deal with the large number of returns, and the molds cost more. Having to send out replacements all the time has got to cut into their bottom line. It's like they specifically decided upon the medium that would perform the worst for them economically.

Unfortunately, I think it will stay, as there are a large number of people that think that Finecast was this gigantic, great improvement over metal, and I just can't see how they can think that way. Everything is bad about it, even the higher price.

With the amount of plastic units that GW produces to cover 90-100% of the standard models that will make up any given army, I can't understand why they can't still just produce the characters in metal like they used to.

Right now I am wanting to start a Deathwing army, and despite what some have said, I really like the Belial model. But I have to sit with the fact that I will never have him, because I won't pay the exorbitant cost of Finecast versus if it were metal, and still have to deal with the inadequacies of the Finecast material and sculpting quality.

Thye could switch to plastic for characters, but I don't think they are that smart. I have no faith in them to make good decisions anymore. I mean, look at the goofy ways that they have done so already towards that end.

For instance, why do they decide to produce a single-sprue Chaos Aspiring Champion in plastic for 20 fething dollars - a model that everyone already has seven different analogies of if they bought the Dark Vengeance set (or bought them as separate bitz online for $4.99 like I did) - when they could have produced Belial in plastic, the one character that people will want to buy alongside their new Deathwing Terminators and would be a flagship character of the newest army to be released?

 SickSix wrote:


Starts slow clap.

I think you could pick almost anyone from DakkaDakka and they could run this company better.

Well....

 Kingsley wrote:

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

Not quite everyone!

 AegisGrimm wrote:


Unfortunately, I think it will stay, as there are a large number of people that think that Finecast was this gigantic, great improvement over metal, and I just can't see how they can think that way. Everything is bad about it, even the higher price.

Don't quite agree with this. I actually believe that, in theory, Finecast is an improvement over metal. If it was in reality what GW claimed it was then I think people would rave about it.

The concept is sound, the execution is flawed.

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

Its a golden age of 40K, but its not a golden age of GW. Far from it.

This, pretty much. 40k is played a lot whereas WHFB has lost a lot of popularity and LotR / The Hobbit...not worth mentioning. At all.

I take it, Kingsley, that everytime you dodge a point, you agree with us?

 Sigvatr wrote:

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

This is currently a golden age of 40k, but many people simply can't accept the fact that GW is actually doing things right for once and hence the Internet naysayers are still in full effect.

Its a golden age of 40K, but its not a golden age of GW. Far from it.

This, pretty much. 40k is played a lot whereas WHFB has lost a lot of popularity and LotR / The Hobbit...not worth mentioning. At all.

I take it, Kingsley, that everytime you dodge a point, you agree with us?

What points am I "dodging?" I never said it was a WHFB or LotR/The Hobbit golden age. The Hobbit has actually been very unpopular in my area, and WHFB faces more direct competition from several other games as well as some questionable design choices for 8th edition.

It must take an epic level of failure for the stubborn children running GW to admit to failure.

Geez, guys - lay off the personal attacks on Kingsley. He was just trying to use actual numbers to talk about the costs of armies. We all continuously complain about GW's price increases, but he went to look at the real numbers including inflation (which, seriously, how many of you have done that? I imagine there are probably a few of you who have also done it, but not many.)

I looked at the numbers myself, just running a comparison of the Space Marine catalog from 2004 to now, converting 2004 prices into today's dollars. While I wouldn't make a blanket statement that 'armies are cheaper today than in 2004', there does appear to be more complexity to the pricing than simply an across the board price increase. I think Kingsley's conclusion about cheaper armies now was spoken without necessarily looking at the full range of armies, but the methods he was using to compare prices were sound. Until you sit down and decide to crunch the numbers yourself, I'd cut Kingsley a little slack.

Personally, I think there's actually a really interesting discussion to be had on how to buy a cheaper army today than in 2004 (which is distinctly plausible.) That said, I'd recommend if you want to debate and beef about price increases that it should be taken to a new thread rather than clogging the FC thread about it.

This could be a Golden Age of GW and it should be. Never before has GW's influence been so wide spread. The iron is hot and cooling quickly. The time to strike is passing by. Insane prices and a failure in company leadership, IMO, have spoiled this. The prices drive away existing customers, forget about new customers. In fact, don't even tell anyone you know how much money this hobby costs, because they will think that you are an idiot.
In the case of Finecast vs Metal; Metal is undeniable as top quality. Even compared to the fine detail of Forgeworld models. People who have no interest in models know that a expertly assembled metal miniature is nice. As far as assembly issues with the product, I've never had any as I assemble models at a masterclass level. My metal Thunderfire cannon is flawless, because I built it that way. My metal Lord of Change is the same and will not break before your Finecast one. Also, I can kill you with it. Easily.

I wonder comparing the prices with 2004 is the amount of miniatures in blisters/boxes the same as now?

Meanwhile the news that FAILCRAP is possibly being removed sweeps acorss the world!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBrLHMCTDAA

Hmmm, 5 minis with optional parts for 33-35USD compared to 10 minis at 30-33 dollars. divide the dollars by the minis to see how much per mini it comes out to. Yes, you have spare bits to add to another box of 5 guys, and a 5 man generic combat squad at their online store sells for 25USD, no changes, no extras, just the basic models at the present price, or what was 3 marines for 8usd is now maybe 10-12usd?

 shasolenzabi wrote:
Hmmm, 5 minis with optional parts for 33-35USD compared to 10 minis at 30-33 dollars. divide the dollars by the minis to see how much per mini it comes out to. Yes, you have spare bits to add to another box of 5 guys, and a 5 man generic combat squad at their online store sells for 25USD, no changes, no extras, just the basic models at the present price, or what was 3 marines for 8usd is now maybe 10-12usd?

What comparison are you making here?

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
I wonder comparing the prices with 2004 is the amount of miniatures in blisters/boxes the same as now?

Not for all of the sets. But it is easy enough to convert the numbers based on a per-model cost.

I wonder if the transition from hand sculpted models to CAD based designs has lessened the cost of profuction at all.

That's something I'd be interested to see.

Thanks for your insight, mechanicalhorizon. Really, really interesting stuff, there!

Personally, I gave finecrap a chance. I've bought about 7 minis, everything from single heroes to Azhag. Every one has had detail-obliterating casting flaws. Not flash or vents, those aren't flaws but a necessary part of the manufacturing process. Could some of the venting be better? Sure. But whining about vents and flash is like whining about bones in your whole fish, i.e. silly.

No, the problems were bubbles, incompletely filled molds, and flat areas so thin I could see through them. These are flaws, and a sign of an out of control manufacturing process. This was over a span of time, but having worked in both QA and QC (there IS a difference) in other industries, it was clear to me that this was not going to get better. GW had decided that those flaws were acceptable, which is why they were sold in the first place and continued to be sold.

The choice was suck it up and drop my standards for what is acceptable, or spend my money elsewhere. I chose the latter.

It was one of the last nails in the coffin driving me from GW to all the other excellent minis that are out there.

Edit- in conclusion, finecast is crap. Minimizing its use would be dmart. Getting rid of it completely be smarter.

SM commander sprue. 'Nuff said

 gunslingerpro wrote:
I wonder if the transition from hand sculpted models to CAD based designs has lessened the cost of profuction at all.

That's something I'd be interested to see.

I don't have numbers to show, but yeah it's decreased their costs considerably.

Before, say for plastics, they would have to make the steel tool and get castings first before they could paint the model and photograph them for box sets, WD etc. That process from sculpt to steel tool could take over a year, IF the tool was made properly and worked properly. If not then they would have to make a new one and the WD team and studio would have to wait.

Going from CAD to rapid prototype is much faster. From CAD to RP parts takes a day or two, at most. No more waiting for the steel tool to be made and test castings to come out. You gets parts within a few days to a week. Then you make a resin castings of the RP parts, which takes another few days. Then you send those parts to the studio so they can paint them and get the box covers made, WD articles etc. All in just a few weeks after the initial sculpt is finished.

The lead time is so much shorter with CAD and it's more versatile. The steel tools are no longer tested when they are made, a computer program runs a virtual test on the molds before any tool is even started. Making changes is relatively easy compared to the old 3-up/pantograph method.

i hate, hate HATE finecast. None of my local shops will stock it so im stuck with ordering one line and every sculpt is redeiculous. Id rather have metal at least i know it would arive safely during shiping. Somebody at GW needs a good hard kick in the junk.

I don't know about a "Golden Age," there's a lot more competition now for GW, both in terms of other miniatures games and computer/console games...

That said, I think the product they're turning out is the best it's ever been, and the best in the industry. The quality of their plastic kits is the best injection molded styrene I've ever seen, and the artistic/design merits are very strong as well.

The Chaos Marines from the Dark Vengeance box are just insane.

I can't really speak to the prices, inflation, bitz per dollar, but I do confess to being rather dumbfounded by the prices (especially when Dark Vengeance is $80 at my FLGS). I went to get 3x Ravenwing bikes, they were $40... And Dark Vengeance, which has three plus, those Chaos Marines, plus Dark Angels, plus all manner of other gibberish, is $80...

So, the prices seem a bit high, but the quality of the printed materials and models (Finecast excepted), is off the charts.

Not sure how the hobby can grow, though, when even I choke a bit on the prices... I'm a (very) gainfully employed adult, I paint very slowly and carefully, and I still can't entirely stomach the prices.

 gunslingerpro wrote:
I wonder if the transition from hand sculpted models to CAD based designs has lessened the cost of profuction at all.
That's something I'd be interested to see.

They already did several copy-paste releases, e.g. Skullcrusher/Bloodcrusher mounts, Seeker/Hellstrider mounts, also Storm/Dark Talon.

 Gymnogyps wrote:
No, the problems were bubbles, incompletely filled molds, and flat areas so thin I could see through them. These are flaws, and a sign of an out of control manufacturing process. This was over a span of time, but having worked in both QA and QC (there IS a difference) in other industries, it was clear to me that this was not going to get better. GW had decided that those flaws were acceptable, which is why they were sold in the first place and continued to be sold.

I'm genuinely curious, Gymnogyps - how would you sum up the differences between QA and QC? From the outside, they sound like very similar roles.

QA is done during development, looking to achieve as few problems in a process as possible. Try to minimize the flaws.

QC is done during production, taking your (hopefully known) flaw rate, looking for the flaws that are produced, and removing/fixing them before they are off the production floor and on to sales. Acknowledge that the flaws exist - find them and don't sell them.

Microprocessors are a good example of this. Any flaw anywhere on the wafer can cause an entire CPU die to fail. So a quick QA solution is to shrink the die size. This is limited by technology, but done about every other major release for Intel. You have the same number of physical flaws (simplistic example!) on a wafer, but a higher % of good dies. QC takes all the dies that are completed and tests them for functionality. Pass the test = sold CPU. Fail = trash. Partial failures (on stress tests) will get a lower MHz rating.

Pulling it back in, I have seen enough good casts to know that Finecast can be usable. But I've also seen enough bad to know that their QA can't be that good and the failure rate is high. The flaws exist. The fact that they get into consumer hands this often means that either their QC is horrific, or they just don't care and say "return policy!"

Quark wrote:
Pulling it back in, I have seen enough good casts to know that Finecast can be usable. But I've also seen enough bad to know that their QA can't be that good and the failure rate is high. The flaws exist. The fact that they get into consumer hands this often means that either their QC is horrific, or they just don't care and say "return policy!"

Careful there pardner - claiming something other than that either that every finecast release is 100% identical to the green, or that every Finecast release has more holes then a rural highway sign.... well, you know what we do to reasonable fellers round these parts?

So far my experience with GW's finecast line has been mixed. I have purchased a blister of Incubi with issues, and a set of mandrakes with issues. My Oblits and Mutilators have been good so far. Asmodeus had issues with the backpack.

Having messed with resin for my own uses in the past, I am less than thrilled to deal with Finecast. Too mercurial a material.

If GW decides to produce plastic lines at reasonable prices (not likely but one can hope). All the better.

But I will believe it when I see it.

I would likely say that any new plastic characters will be at or above the Finecast prices. Probably about the same scale as Finecast to metal, when Finecast replaces metal models with about a 50% markup or higher. The new advance order Chaos Lord is $25. That's more expensive than Finecast Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I would likely say that any new plastic characters will be at or above the Finecast prices. Probably about the same scale as Finecast to metal, when Finecast replaces metal models with about a 50% markup or higher. The new advance order Chaos Lord is $25. That's more expensive than Finecast Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

And the limited Chaplain in Dark Vengeance only cost $8...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and he came with a full-color page describing him, and showing how to assemble him.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Gymnogyps wrote:
No, the problems were bubbles, incompletely filled molds, and flat areas so thin I could see through them. These are flaws, and a sign of an out of control manufacturing process. This was over a span of time, but having worked in both QA and QC (there IS a difference) in other industries, it was clear to me that this was not going to get better. GW had decided that those flaws were acceptable, which is why they were sold in the first place and continued to be sold.

I'm genuinely curious, Gymnogyps - how would you sum up the differences between QA and QC? From the outside, they sound like very similar roles.

Quark hit it pretty good, but here is a nice summary from wikipedia, emphasis mine (I know, bad reference, but the language is decent):

"Quality control emphasizes testing of products to uncover defects and reporting to management who make the decision to allow or deny product release, whereas quality assurance attempts to improve and stabilize production (and associated processes) to avoid, or at least minimize, issues which led to the defect(s) in the first place."

Even more simplified... QC is much more black and white, asking does this product pass or not. QA is more how do we monitor for our failures, and ensure we meet our acceptable standard for rate of failure... and if we don't meet it, why? What happened?

Keep in mind, absolutely zero defects is impossible. Getting to an acceptable rate of failure, for the intended use of the product, and at an acceptable cost, is the goal. Absolute perfection may be impossible, but if the customer is willing to pay and the product requires it, close enough to no failures can be done, but we're talking things like aseptically filled sterile injectable drugs (where one failure, i.e. non sterile unit, can kill or seriously injure someone), or things like the critical parts for airplanes or nuclear submarines. Extreme examples, but these are the things where failure must be minimized to the maximum extent possible.

I don't expect zero defects from a miniature. But 100% defect rate, at least to me, as the customer, sends a clear message that my needs are not being met. That this did not improve over a long span of time tells me that the process is what it is. Keep in mind, when I say the process is "out of control", I'm referring to lack of control of the process, and its failure to deliver an acceptable product. That's all.

So tying it all together, absolute perfection is impossible, less flaws come at higher cost. There is something inherently broken about the product to me, as a customer, when I'm paying more but am getting more defects.

Edit - was tired last night, forgot a critical point.

QC can only analyze for the failures that are known to be failures. There must be criteria. Similarly, QA must ensure the process is meeting the standards for the intended use. You know what happens when a QC guy or gal starts asking about stuff not on the specification for inspection? Or QA investigates a non-failure? They get told to STFU and get back in the lab or go read a procedure something.

There are ZERO QA/QC issues with finecast if GW management has mandated the acceptable quality standard is as it is. That the problems have not gone away, issues have not been acknowledged, and that it was released in the state it was, makes it pretty clear that management has made this decision.

You know what quality criteria work for the finecast minis I've received? Hold it 3 feet away, does it look like the mini its supposed to? Yes. PASS! Take 2 seconds to glance at the mini on sprue, does it look vaguely like all the parts are there? Yes. PASS! The problems I have actually had are things like my Vargulf missing fur and spikes on the top, which I only noticed when I put it together... only when two pieces were right next to each other could you see the problem.

Summing up again... QC analyzes based on criteria established ultimately by management. If nothing fails then the process is working the way it is supposed to, and QA has no investigation / corrective actions to do. You don't "improve" a process if its making acceptable product! It isn't QA/QC failure if management has determined the flaws we see are acceptable.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I would likely say that any new plastic characters will be at or above the Finecast prices. Probably about the same scale as Finecast to metal, when Finecast replaces metal models with about a 50% markup or higher. The new advance order Chaos Lord is $25. That's more expensive than Finecast Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

It's more expensive than some Forgeworld Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
The new advance order Chaos Lord is $25. That's more expensive than Finecast Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

It's more expensive than some Forgeworld Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

Really? Which ones?

 Breotan wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
The new advance order Chaos Lord is $25. That's more expensive than Finecast Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

It's more expensive than some Forgeworld Terminator characters on 40mm bases.

Really? Which ones?

$25 AUD is 16.4390 pounds.
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Space_Marines/Red_Scorpions/COMMANDER_CULLN_OF_THE_RED_SCORPIONS_.html
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Space_Marines/Space_Marine-Infantry-and-Accessories/TYBEROS_THE_RED_WAKE.html
Those two termi characters are 16 pounds each.

Yes that's like 40 cents more or whatever and you still need to pay shipping but that is still a plastic 25mm character that is more expensive than a resin terminator character.

Hardly compares with the price difference between that plastic Chaos Lord and the (suprisingly cheaper) Finecast characters like Lysander or even Draigo.

Yeah, but you can be sure they'll only stay cheaper for a few months...

With each crazy move of GW, I just hope more that Gates of Antares gets funded properly and ends up being as good as I've hoped.

I still miss metal, have several all metal armies I refuse to taint with finecast
plastic is, well plastic its always been there, and if metal won't come back then at least finecast won't wholly take over
that wouldn't surprise me though, if GW decided to make everything finecast since its the cheapest, and jack up the prices to forgeworld levels

My issues were with the Necron characters, lords and named all scare me to handle as Iam afraid of the brittle nature of the thin parts that are rendered in Finecast, I had to replace a section of a warscythe on a lord with a plastic section from another model due to that uber delicate nature.

 Gymnogyps wrote:
Thanks for your insight, mechanicalhorizon. Really, really interesting stuff, there!

Personally, I gave finecrap a chance. I've bought about 7 minis, everything from single heroes to Azhag. Every one has had detail-obliterating casting flaws. Not flash or vents, those aren't flaws but a necessary part of the manufacturing process. Could some of the venting be better? Sure. But whining about vents and flash is like whining about bones in your whole fish, i.e. silly.

When there is a row of millimetre wide studs on the sleeve of a crusader model, and the vent is wider than the studs and running completely over them, so that in effect there is no stud, then I think I'm allowed to "whine" about the venting.

I don't even want to take the chance, considering what I have seen and how much it costs
its a gamble I probably won't win

 shasolenzabi wrote:
My issues were with the Necron characters, lords and named all scare me to handle as Iam afraid of the brittle nature of the thin parts that are rendered in Finecast, I had to replace a section of a warscythe on a lord with a plastic section from another model due to that uber delicate nature.

We renamed Obryon to Vargard Obendryon after what he looked like after he came out of a very expensive Battlefoam case. His Warscythe was a banana, Necron characters are by far the worse I have seen overall in finecast. A mixture of thin parts, bendy parts and flat surfaces which get that porous sponge like quality. It's just terrible.

While it is pleasing in some ways, it is also disheartening in other ways.

Yes plastic is fantastic but the detail isn't quite upto finecast standard, though it is very much better than metal wit these multi part plastic kits IMO.

Still i like the variety at the moment, finecast is as easy as plastic to convert and I feel people are growing on it.
The quality of the casting has improved too. The main issue with it is thin sword and the like break easy.

Plastic wins out overall I think they should see finecast out, see if it picks up and don't jump the gun on this.

Somehow I just can't see plastic special characters, I know GW has one but he is on a griffin.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2350408a_99120202030_KarlFranz01_873x627.jpg