Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

We still haven't seen anything about the vehicle.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

Today we are taking a quick look at the final layout of The Damned Command frame.
We've had to make some really tough decisions over the parts that made it onto this sprue. There has been a lot of back and forth between the design team and the engineering team to ensure we put together the most comprehensive and versatile command sprue possible!

We've managed to include three human sized male bodies, a brute sized body and a female body plus all of the accessories needed to kit those models out!

Let us know your thoughts below!

I can also confirm that all parts that don't make it onto any of the final sprues will be made available for free too all backers as STL's!

Why are we talking about missing bits, again?

Look at how sparse this sprue is, much like GW used to make 10-15 years ago. Why not pack it with bits like GW is doing now? WGA should be trying to at least get close to its main competitor, not release substandard product missing a lot of what was promised when half of the sprue is empty. Yes, I get they can't match GW specializing slicing/packing tool but it would be trivial to fit at least dozen+ bits more here

Say, top right, you could put 4 different ogre heads there if the comically dumb horizontal left head didn't take all the space and was vertical, like the right one. Space right below, move horizontal comm backpack to the right and make it vertical, boom, space for 5 extra arms instead of current 2. 6A space, swap big and small torso, presto, room for 4-5 bits instead of just one arm. 4A space could be trivially condensed to half its size. Etc, etc, are WGA molding machines so bad compared to GW ones they can't do it or something else technical or is it just unwillingness to put in some extra work?

It would be great if they could fit more on there, but it's hardly trivial (and in at least some plastics firms the 'cutters' are more in demand and more highly paid than the sculptors)

Their parts density has gone up from their first kits, and since they moved they're working with a new lot of engineers who may need to learn some lessons again. I hope they can carry on improving. Remember if they get the placement wrong the mould won't fill correctly and you're left with a sprue with miscast or missing parts and have to start again from scratch [Edit or if you can rescue it it can involve adding extra sprue gates with connection points in unfavourable places]

GW is large enough (and sells enough) to afford a higher failure rate in addition to having years more experience

for example look at a recent Renedra sprue (Ex-GW team who tool their old 3-up based tech when GW went digital) who have a ton of experience and still regularly produce stuff that's nowhere near as packed as a GW sprue



that said i'd certainly love it if WGA could fit more on the sprues, but i'm certain they would if they could, after all the more they can fit on the better value the kit looks and the better it will sell

Latest SP

Well that's just death fields samurai power armour innit

 Irbis wrote:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

Today we are taking a quick look at the final layout of The Damned Command frame.
We've had to make some really tough decisions over the parts that made it onto this sprue. There has been a lot of back and forth between the design team and the engineering team to ensure we put together the most comprehensive and versatile command sprue possible!

We've managed to include three human sized male bodies, a brute sized body and a female body plus all of the accessories needed to kit those models out!

Let us know your thoughts below!

I can also confirm that all parts that don't make it onto any of the final sprues will be made available for free too all backers as STL's!

Why are we talking about missing bits, again?

Look at how sparse this sprue is, much like GW used to make 10-15 years ago. Why not pack it with bits like GW is doing now? WGA should be trying to at least get close to its main competitor, not release substandard product missing a lot of what was promised when half of the sprue is empty. Yes, I get they can't match GW specializing slicing/packing tool but it would be trivial to fit at least dozen+ bits more here

Say, top right, you could put 4 different ogre heads there if the comically dumb horizontal left head didn't take all the space and was vertical, like the right one. Space right below, move horizontal comm backpack to the right and make it vertical, boom, space for 5 extra arms instead of current 2. 6A space, swap big and small torso, presto, room for 4-5 bits instead of just one arm. 4A space could be trivially condensed to half its size. Etc, etc, are WGA molding machines so bad compared to GW ones they can't do it or something else technical or is it just unwillingness to put in some extra work?

Hi Ibris - I usually bite my tongue when I see posts like this but I think this is a good time to educate folks a little on how tooling works, why we do it the way we do, and why most plastic injection engineers laugh at the GW frames. First - here's an apples-to-apples comparison of the new Damned Infantry frame and the Imperial Guard frame from GW:


As you can see - our frame is slightly larger, but has many more parts than the GW one (even if you account for theirs being increased by the same %)
But what's somewhat more interesting is that their smaller frame weighs more than our larger one with more parts. And the reason is bad engineering.

Now I know I'm swimming against the current here because calling out GW is like calling out Coke or McDonalds or Mercedes - brands that are so locked into the zetigeist of our culture that they can do no wrong in the eyes of their fans...but the reality is that the way GW tools their frames is...not good.

You'll notice we use round runners to carry the plastic through the tool. GW has those half hexagon things that are much larger. The reason they're larger is because the shape doesn't work well for plastic flow. For some reason they have stuck with it - but they have to design around that runner shape to make their parts fill. That's why they have two injection points on the frame - they have to really force that plastic through the frame from two points whereas we can just use one and get a perfect fill.

They also have some oddness in their gates (the piece that touches the part that comes off the runners). You'll notice they have some quite large reservoirs in the gates. This too is to help the parts fill better because their oddly shaped runners aren't working well.

The end result is that there is way more plastic in the runners on the frame than there are actual parts. Those frames APPEAR to have more parts but that's because a lot of the white space is taken up by the huge honking runners twisting all over the place. No manufacturer can leave less than about 5mm of space around a part (in order to keep the integrity of the metal mold face) and because these types of parts are so organic they sometimes need more "white space" around them than they would if they were all uniform. There is also the consideration of balancing the mold whereby you need to make sure that the plastic is flowing relatively at the same rate throughout the frame and filling up all those parts even if one is a thin spear and another is a giant ogre body part. It's very hard to do. Anyone doing this kind of tooling is working at the top of the game in injection molding.

GW makes great models, they have great detail, but the way they make their frames is just not up to industry standards. They make it work - but it also takes them a lot to achieve a final tool. Ever notice those little dots in the corner of one of the frames? That shows how many times the tool had to come off the test press to fix something and make it work better. This particular one has 10 dots. We usually have our frames working after the second try - and a lot of times our guys nail it on the first test shots.

Do we think we're better than GW - no of course not. We're the size of their company toilet paper budget probably. Do we think our tooling is better? Yes 100%. Will we continue to get better. Also yes. We're five years in it will be really interesting to see what we look like in another 5. Now, don't get me started about GW's move to all mono-pose models!

Their new curvilinear honeycomb frames also make it harder to make sprue brick terrain and spruecrons.

 Wargames Atlantic wrote:
Hi Ibris - I usually bite my tongue when I see posts like this but I think this is a good time to educate folks a little on how tooling works, why we do it the way we do, and why most plastic injection engineers laugh at the GW frames. First - here's an apples-to-apples comparison of the new Damned Infantry frame and the Imperial Guard frame from GW:

Spoiler:

As you can see - our frame is slightly larger, but has many more parts than the GW one (even if you account for theirs being increased by the same %)
But what's somewhat more interesting is that their smaller frame weighs more than our larger one with more parts. And the reason is bad engineering.

Now I know I'm swimming against the current here because calling out GW is like calling out Coke or McDonalds or Mercedes - brands that are so locked into the zetigeist of our culture that they can do no wrong in the eyes of their fans...but the reality is that the way GW tools their frames is...not good.

You'll notice we use round runners to carry the plastic through the tool. GW has those half hexagon things that are much larger. The reason they're larger is because the shape doesn't work well for plastic flow. For some reason they have stuck with it - but they have to design around that runner shape to make their parts fill. That's why they have two injection points on the frame - they have to really force that plastic through the frame from two points whereas we can just use one and get a perfect fill.

They also have some oddness in their gates (the piece that touches the part that comes off the runners). You'll notice they have some quite large reservoirs in the gates. This too is to help the parts fill better because their oddly shaped runners aren't working well.

The end result is that there is way more plastic in the runners on the frame than there are actual parts. Those frames APPEAR to have more parts but that's because a lot of the white space is taken up by the huge honking runners twisting all over the place. No manufacturer can leave less than about 5mm of space around a part (in order to keep the integrity of the metal mold face) and because these types of parts are so organic they sometimes need more "white space" around them than they would if they were all uniform. There is also the consideration of balancing the mold whereby you need to make sure that the plastic is flowing relatively at the same rate throughout the frame and filling up all those parts even if one is a thin spear and another is a giant ogre body part. It's very hard to do. Anyone doing this kind of tooling is working at the top of the game in injection molding.

GW makes great models, they have great detail, but the way they make their frames is just not up to industry standards. They make it work - but it also takes them a lot to achieve a final tool. Ever notice those little dots in the corner of one of the frames? That shows how many times the tool had to come off the test press to fix something and make it work better. This particular one has 10 dots. We usually have our frames working after the second try - and a lot of times our guys nail it on the first test shots.

Do we think we're better than GW - no of course not. We're the size of their company toilet paper budget probably. Do we think our tooling is better? Yes 100%. Will we continue to get better. Also yes. We're five years in it will be really interesting to see what we look like in another 5. Now, don't get me started about GW's move to all mono-pose models!

I will say for myself, I would love more posts like this. This was hugely informative and I really enjoyed learning about the technology behind the kit production. Honestly, I'd watch a whole How It's Made type show about making miniatures or action figures. Thanks for this!

@WGA - how close are we to the werewolves, any info? Cannot wait for the pups to be available

Thanks Scotty!

Shadow - waiting on a layout for them right now but we have a bunch of stuff in the queue before them which includes a lot of work we are doing for another company that I'm not allowed to talk about (to give you an idea we've done something like 11 frames for them over the last few months with more than that in the works now.) The queue got a little jammed up with that and the ongoing Damned work but as you've probably noticed we've been increasing the speed that we've been releasing so they shouldn't be all that far off. And the Sneakfeet!

 Wargames Atlantic wrote:

Shadow - waiting on a layout for them right now but we have a bunch of stuff in the queue before them which includes a lot of work we are doing for another company that I'm not allowed to talk about (to give you an idea we've done something like 11 frames for them over the last few months with more than that in the works now.) The queue got a little jammed up with that and the ongoing Damned work but as you've probably noticed we've been increasing the speed that we've been releasing so they shouldn't be all that far off. And the Sneakfeet!

OK, thanks

thanks for your extra 'behind the scenes' input

Has this been mentioned?

https://wargamesatlantic.com/collections/general-accoutrements/products/25mm-textured-bases-3mm-bevel




My old comrade in arms, General Accoutrements (we served together with General Tso and General Alert) now has US$15 for 48 textured plastic bases. (~0.30 a base)

At last!

I am a simple man, I do not ask for much, if I never have to flock a flocking base again I will be happy.

Well I hope Major Retail Chain gets in on that action.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Well I hope Major Retail Chain gets in on that action.

I'm more interested in Major Hottie myself! :

Although, I will buy the textured bases. I've mentioned it before, but I'm tired of having to pull out the glue, sand and/or flock too.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
My old comrade in arms, General Accoutrements (we served together with General Tso and General Alert) now has US$15 for 48 textured plastic bases. (~0.30 a base)

What about General Store? General Admission? General Foods? Or for the lower ranks, Private Property and Corporal Punishment?

 Ancestral Hamster wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Well I hope Major Retail Chain gets in on that action.

I'm more interested in Major Hottie myself! :

Although, I will buy the textured bases. I've mentioned it before, but I'm tired of having to pull out the glue, sand and/or flock too.

Major Hottie is part of our forthcoming NSFW plastics range debuting this April 1.

Glad you like the bases - we think they'll be a hit as you can really just skip the whole putty, glue, flock thing and get right to painting.

What other size/type bases do you (collectively) want to see us do?

 Wargames Atlantic wrote:
What other size/type bases do you (collectively) want to see us do?

Well I'm sure you know the official GW sizes. Fantasy city streets would be nice (cobbles, wood, sidewalk edges, sewer covers...) Truth be told there aren't all that many styles that can done flat enough to not look terrible when a flat foot is glued to it.

32mm round bases would be nice. Can we get them by next week?

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Wargames Atlantic wrote:
What other size/type bases do you (collectively) want to see us do?

Well I'm sure you know the official GW sizes. Fantasy city streets would be nice (cobbles, wood, sidewalk edges, sewer covers...) Truth be told there aren't all that many styles that can done flat enough to not look terrible when a flat foot is glued to it.

I second the street bases. I'd also like desert rock like the Painted Desert of the US Southwest. So a low "mesa" type rock with gravel or sand on the rest of the base. Kinda of want cracked dry lake bed, but I rarely use that, and when I have, I've used crackle paint. Since few gamers I've seen use cracked lake bed, it may not be profitable for your company to bother with it.

You could do bases of other shapes than round like oval for example.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
32mm round bases would be nice. Can we get them by next week?

That's a very odd size? What uses 32mm bases?!?!

 Wargames Atlantic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
32mm round bases would be nice. Can we get them by next week?

That's a very odd size? What uses 32mm bases?!?!

The new Space Marines!

Thanks for sharing that info on production and casting. GW is definitely out of date on those runners, also the number of times for a run to be successful. I always thought those dots were just QC read by a laser or something.

Many things in Warhammer use 32mm bases, both AoS and 40K, as well as Blood Bowl. The clear styrene flying stands are also 32mm. There's actually very few GW gigures still using 25mm round bases for anymore, most of it has swapped to either 32mm or to 28mm bases. 25mm is still pretty much standard for every other minis manufacturer though

Personally, I'd LOVE dungeon flagstone beveled 25mm bases, currently I make my own from Renedra's flat stone textured ones glued onto slimmer 3mm beveled bases. They look fantastic, but it's quite a lot of work. Even having 25mm rounds ready cast would save me a ton of effort.

I'm the truly weird one who wants 30mm round for all my miniatures!

I find the 32mm just a bit too large for most things I want to use my miniatures for, so I put my AOS stuff on 30mm. Makes it much easier for them to fit inside buildings etc. for skirmish settings and they don't look so ridiculous next to my old 25mm round stuff. Also likely a function of the majority of my collection being ASOIAF stuff which comes on 30mm rounds already.

 Gallahad wrote:
I'm the truly weird one who wants 30mm round for all my miniatures!

I use 30mm rounds in place of GWs 32s, as I use Renedra bases as I like their thinness, and 30mm is the closest they do. Also, GW 32s are actually 30mm wide on the top, so from a model fit perspective.there isn't any difference.

I'll happily use larger sizes when the size of the model dictates, but I'm sticking with 25mm slotta's or their equivalent for most things. These 25mm , straight beveled, textured bases will be in my hands this year for sure. They should be a great solution for basing.

I am slightly concerned as to whether the textured grainy surface will glue well to flat-bottomed model feet and the potential for them to look like they're floating over the gravel. Issues not faced by the textured bases I've used from Proxie Models and Champ Industries where the bases are still essentially flat. Still, I have high hopes that a bit of strong solvent adhesive will make these issues moot.

Oh, and one more vote for Cobblestone pattern. A supremely useful texure for genres from far past/fantasy through modern times and into the future.

 Wargames Atlantic wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
32mm round bases would be nice. Can we get them by next week?

That's a very odd size? What uses 32mm bases?!?!

Lots of things Landsknecht Werewolves, Amazon Vampires, Green Martians...

Almost any game that uses a base with a lip uses 32 as their baseline infantry base. I use 32mm non-lipped bases all the time and I can't be alone.

 Gallahad wrote:
I'm the truly weird one who wants 30mm round for all my miniatures!

I find the 32mm just a bit too large for most things I want to use my miniatures for, so I put my AOS stuff on 30mm. Makes it much easier for them to fit inside buildings etc. for skirmish settings and they don't look so ridiculous next to my old 25mm round stuff. Also likely a function of the majority of my collection being ASOIAF stuff which comes on 30mm rounds already.

Same... back when Miniature Market sold the old Confrontation Ragnarök bases for dirt cheap, I would buy a bunch every time I did an order. Those went away, but Impact did a kickstarter to make 30mm bases and I have since switched to those (which are available on Amazon). 30mm is just close enough to 25mm that it only slightly overhangs combat grids in RPGs too. So all "heroes" or major NPCs are on 30's to help them stand out and I put mooks on 25's.