Personally what is your least liked army in style? The army that just looks bland, boring or out of place?

For me im going with Slaanesh, they used to have such beautiful models, that reminded me of greek mythology style female demons. Now they are seriously ugly cross dressers with some very boring units like the Farming equipment sorry I mean Seeker Chariots. They just feel and look uninspired and boringly safe. I understand that GW is aiming for a younger demographic now but boobs = bad? come on guys its the 40k!
You play it safe for Slaanesh and you have lost the whole point of the chaos god.

I preferr the new look of daemonettes, we diddn't need more supermodel women in the game, and making them horrific monsters and female to boot, to me made it seem more mature, not less.

Personally, i'm not a fan of the look of Thousand suns, the crazy headcrests just don't do it for me, and I love tzeentch, so having the cult troops not look tzeentchy in my mind, is a bummer.

I hate how Tyranids look. That's pretty much it. Their aesthetic has never appealed to me. Pretty much every army has at least one model I nod my head at and say "I could paint that." Not Tyranids.

Im sorry, but there really is no competition here.
The older ones by diaz are great models.
The new ones, erm, im not sure where to start with whats wrong.

Every army has its low points, but overall I dislike the demons as a range the most. There are some high points, but I don't like any of the war machines, and some of the demon types just fall flat to me.

Looks are entirely subjective though, so YMMV.

All space marine chapters look completly identical except colour which makes them all bland and boring

Orks. More specifically, the regular Ork Boyz. The Gorilla butt poses have to go.

 Jackal wrote:





Im sorry, but there really is no competition here.
The older ones by diaz are great models.
The new ones, erm, im not sure where to start with whats wrong.

Maybe it's just a gal-gamer thing, but I still prefer the new models. When I want to play the horrific monsters from beyond the universe, I want to play something horrific and disarmingly creepy, not just a naked chick with some extra boobs added. Slaanesh is about more than boobs.

The sisters models are badly in need of updating. But everyone agrees on that. I'd say catachan are uglier than they need be for a plastic kit, though.

I don't want to derail the thread too much but I'm with Evileyes, New Daemonettes> Old Daemonettes, but that's a topic for a different thread.

I think Sisters of Battle are the worst, the execution is just terrible. Concept wise a gothic space ecclesiarchy is about as 40k as 40k can get but man are they hideous.

40k:

ATM it's chaos for me, because the entire range is spread across several aesthetics, designs and about 15 years of minis. Together on a table, the whole thing looks messy for me, not least of all for the 'hey, we put spike on our gak!' half hearted sculpting/modeling that's gone on.

The Dark Vengence set and several of the minis that came out around the same time were a great improvement on the prior 'horns n spike' marines, but without a reworked rank and file kit, no go.



Fantasy:

All the Elf armies need a serious re-tool. The Wood Elves far more than the other two, they have such an amazing concept, Neutral, violent, savage celtic wild hunt elves and yet the models fall so incredibly short of what's needed, that and the range is ancient, and again, disjoined in it's aesthetic.



Warmahordes:

Skorne, they just utterly fail to capture my imagination and again, it's a shame, cos their background is very cool, but they just don't inspire as a range.

Catachan, Eldar and Sisters infantry are all bad designs imo. Everything else has at most a few sculpts that I don't like but the rest is fine. Dino bots for chaos, dreadnoughts for any SM flavour, that big stompy thing for Orks, stealth suits for Tau.

Necrons is the only army I like every sculpt for I think, despite not liking certain aspects from some such as the pilot of the scythes being visible.

I guess for 40k some of the Eldar range is ugly to me like the warp spiders but no army is just won't play it bad for me. Now for fantasy I can't stand the Dwarf range. The front of the models is all beard and toes. They did not do the stunties justice.

I'm probably alone on in this one but I think the imperial guard infantry armies look so boring. I like this game for the high fantasy and future tech, and then someone comes In With their ww2 IG. On the other hand, the tank models are pretty cool and a mech guard army does catch my eye.

Chaos Daemons. Boring models and boring vehicles. They really could do a better job with an army that's supposed to be a collection of horrors from beyond our universe.

I like both daemonettes. I always thought of them like this: The Old Diaz ones are what they look like to an allured onlooker and the new ones are what they really are.

TBH, the weakest part of range is nurgle. Those Daemons just look goofy. The other daemons could be scary but nurgle daemons look like dopey snot monsters.

+1 on sisters followed by the regular catachan infantry.

The problem with the Diaz demonette models is that GW has always represented the hermaphroditic nature of the demonettes with one male and one female breast, with occasional multiples on one side or the other. His models failed at the conception stage to represent slaanesh despite their appeal to young boys because they have tits on both sides.


Worst models have to be the catachans, by far but they have made an enormous pile of money for GW over the years.

Space marine flying potato is mock worthy as is the DA flying pope mobile.

The over equipped tech marine may be one of the most inane SM sculpts but there are a few duds here and there.

Werewalrus wrote:
Orks. More specifically, the regular Ork Boyz. The Gorilla butt poses have to go.

Oh god a million times this. Everything about the ork boy kit is perfect except for the stupid way their arses hang out. Its been bugging me ever since I started irks. Their spine literally is in the shape of a "J".

My vote goes for the plastic cadian line. Catachans can actually look decent painted up, but plastic cadians take a ton of work to make them look interesting. I still wonder why they ditched the old cadian look, it can't have been any harder to make as a plastic kit than space Marines are with their separate shoulder armor. Oh well, at least we have enough bits makers out there that I can practically make them myself.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Werewalrus wrote:
Orks. More specifically, the regular Ork Boyz. The Gorilla butt poses have to go.

Oh god a million times this. Everything about the ork boy kit is perfect except for the stupid way their arses hang out. Its been bugging me ever since I started irks. Their spine literally is in the shape of a "J".

At least it's better than the previous scrawny ork models with their look of pleasant constipation.

IG Tanks bore me and look silly in proportion. A lot of the Chaos Marine stuff is flat out goofy.

I think all the art work across the armies produce great models, but most of the stuff in Fantasy just doesn't strike a chord. I'm building a Skaven army, cause I mean, rats n stuff, but outside of that, it seems just a bit too generic.

I feel as if the Tau is a bit out of place in terms of aesthetic (among other things) in this universe, so it's Tau for me. That's just my personal bias though.

To be fair to guard, you have to have someone play the straight man. Someone to represent "normal" so that everything else looks crazier.

Anyways, I'll kind of mirror the disappointment with the recent demons and CSM minis (especially dark vengeance, which was a let-down for me, especially given just how good the DA minis look). I also think that the clown-colored bug-lizard things that masquerade as an intergalactic terror are dumb as well.

That said, all of those models, in the hands of good painters, at least stand a chance of looking good, whether it being cthulhu tyranid, or hordes of CSM terminators, for example.

My vote, therefore, goes to the army that no one, not even good painters, can make look good. My vote, then, goes to dark eldar.

To begin with, all of their old stuff is complete and utter garbage. In case you forgot, until very recently, this is what their wyches looked like:



While other ranges have some good looking older minis, not so with dark eldar.

Now, their current range has helped things out an awful lot, and their new talos engine looks downright cool, but... well...



I still see an army with lots of awkward detail (really, a top knot held in place by a bone? How many random spikes do you need? etc.), and, well, minis that look so bad that the only way you can make them look remotely decent is by painting them black.

That and some of their units, like grotesques, are just lolwhut awful. Well-executed awful, but still awful.

I just can't stand the "new" Tau stealth suits. To me they honestly look like toasters with arms and legs. It doesn't fit into the other suit's aesthetic at all.

So glad finecast still makes the old ones.

I would say the Tau chickens...Kroot are just stupid looking.

 Ailaros wrote:
To be fair to guard, you have to have someone play the straight man. Someone to represent "normal" so that everything else looks crazier.

Anyways, I'll kind of mirror the disappointment with the recent demons and CSM minis (especially dark vengeance, which was a let-down for me, especially given just how good the DA minis look). I also think that the clown-colored bug-lizard things that masquerade as an intergalactic terror are dumb as well.

That said, all of those models, in the hands of good painters, at least stand a chance of looking good, whether it being cthulhu tyranid, or hordes of CSM terminators, for example.

My vote, therefore, goes to the army that no one, not even good painters, can make look good. My vote, then, goes to dark eldar.

To begin with, all of their old stuff is complete and utter garbage. In case you forgot, until very recently, this is what their wyches looked like:



While other ranges have some good looking older minis, not so with dark eldar.

Now, their current range has helped things out an awful lot, and their new talos engine looks downright cool, but... well...



I still see an army with lots of awkward detail (really, a top knot held in place by a bone? How many random spikes do you need? etc.), and, well, minis that look so bad that the only way you can make them look remotely decent is by painting them black.

That and some of their units, like grotesques, are just lolwhut awful. Well-executed awful, but still awful.

Oh no no no, the new dark eldar stuff is, in my opinion, the coolest set of models in the game right now! Nothing looks more badass than a well painted dark eldar army imo. I love the tron feel

I agree with Ailaros to some extent... DE definitely don't need that many spikes, not only are they so easy to break, they're also power from pain... Now, if they add in the FAQ that everytime a DE player get pricked by the spikey models, the unit gets a free pain token...

And on topic: my vote is on sisters, was actually 1 of my initial choice until I saw those models... Ugh... I look forward to 2019 when they renew their codex and hopefully their entire model line.

I can look at any army and say "oh man i want that. I want to paint that so bad." except for daemons. I have never wanted a single daemon model. For creatures that are supposed to be the equivalent of hell spawn they just really aren't scary. CM and DE look evil, but the daemons have always looked more comical then evil. oh and they need to re do the phoenix lords. come on its been like 2 editions make some new bad ass models for those guys.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Werewalrus wrote:
Orks. More specifically, the regular Ork Boyz. The Gorilla butt poses have to go.

Oh god a million times this. Everything about the ork boy kit is perfect except for the stupid way their arses hang out. Its been bugging me ever since I started irks. Their spine literally is in the shape of a "J".

At least it's better than the previous scrawny ork models with their look of pleasant constipation.

Better than old models doesn't equal good models. The current lot of standard Orks for 40k and Fantasy all run around looking like they're trying to do a crap.

I really get excited thinking about doing an Ork army, then I remember the Ork Boyz kit and immediately scrap the idea.

Orks (The asthetic just never really appealed) and CSM for me. GW had a chance to finally fix the Spiky Space Marines theme that CSM had fallen into and with Dark Vengeance i thought they'd nailed it. But nooo... an awful release later the CSM range is one of the most jumbled and silly looking out there.

And all you complaining about the spikes on DE? Remember they used to be seperate spikes you had to glue on... man... talk about fiddly.

Ork boyz may be silly, but orks as a model range isn't a total waste. Battlewagons and trukks and bikes, etc. still look cool enough.

Not a particular codex, but very vehicle in the Imperium Armory except for Forge World's Venerable Dreadnoughts.

sisters of battle (with no helmets).

The sisters of battle faces just look really bad to me. I love them with helmets, but the current face art just looks, strange to me for some reason. It's weird, too, cuz SoB have some models I'm a big fan of too. But the faces get me

 Ailaros wrote:
Ork boyz may be silly, but orks as a model range isn't a total waste. Battlewagons and trukks and bikes, etc. still look cool enough.

Well yeah, like I said, I only scrap my idea when I remember the Ork Boyz kit. I'm very fond of everything else in the range, but the requirement of 'more boyz!' is just unacceptable with those models.

Just my thought but, Necrons. They don't look too bad and they are kind of cool, imo they are all the same. Just my thoughts.

How is an army that doesn't look bad and looks cool the worst looking army?

Not to mention, outside of Orks, every army suffers from 'looks the same' syndrome, since they're designed to be painted with a uniform look.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
Ork boyz may be silly, but orks as a model range isn't a total waste. Battlewagons and trukks and bikes, etc. still look cool enough.

Well yeah, like I said, I only scrap my idea when I remember the Ork Boyz kit. I'm very fond of everything else in the range, but the requirement of 'more boyz!' is just unacceptable with those models.

You could always go with 3rd party legs I guess.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
Ork boyz may be silly, but orks as a model range isn't a total waste. Battlewagons and trukks and bikes, etc. still look cool enough.

Well yeah, like I said, I only scrap my idea when I remember the Ork Boyz kit. I'm very fond of everything else in the range, but the requirement of 'more boyz!' is just unacceptable with those models.

You could always go with 3rd party legs I guess.

If I ever found any that looked decent I'd consider it. The porblem with the legs is a symptom of the shape of the torso - the J hook at the bottom of the torso reinforces the needed shape of the pelvic area on any legs.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
40k:

ATM it's chaos for me, because the entire range is spread across several aesthetics, designs and about 15 years of minis. Together on a table, the whole thing looks messy for me, not least of all for the 'hey, we put spike on our gak!' half hearted sculpting/modeling that's gone on.

The Dark Vengence set and several of the minis that came out around the same time were a great improvement on the prior 'horns n spike' marines, but without a reworked rank and file kit, no go.

I agree with this and its really what annoys me about gw. With necrons and dark eldar they did such a geat job reinventing the whole range, but since 6th they kind of just "bolt-on" a flyer and oval base mc to the existing range.

I love the dark vengeance and new chaos but like you say, having the old stuff mixed in looks bad.

Well, or just don't field boyz. You can do deffwing or a bike list without a single boy model.

Chaos daemons imo they look so squishy compared to the old models, someone mention warp spiders looking ugly, imo warp spiders and actually most eldar units in the codex are by far the most interesting and unique models in the 40k universe. They needed to revamp some of the basic chaos models and have some extra goodies for their vehicles to give that possessed and evil look imo. But chaos is still most interesting then the vanilla marines imo.

Also, I don't QUITE get the hatred of the demon line either. Yeah, the slaanesh ones look rather crappy (though the exalted chariot isn't that bad), but some of the stuff looks great, especially the nurglings and plague drones. The new flamers don't look that bad either.

I mean, it's certainly not the prettiest army, but I don't see how it quite qualifies as the worst.

Don't like Orks in general, so my vote goes to the Orks.

I would have to say that the worst looking army is most likely a Nurgle army that walked into my local shop roughly...2 weeks ago late at night. It was your standard green with yellow highlights, but not much variety in the colors (which we figured out why about 2 minutes later). The lady had us turn off the lights and go figure, it glowed fairly bright in the dark. Had to give her credit for that.

On the whole Ork thing though, if people hate Ork Boyz, why not run a ton of Gretchin instead?

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:
On the whole Ork thing though, if people hate Ork Boyz, why not run a ton of Gretchin instead?

...really? You expect people to run around with a ton of T2?

I never like Ogryn

Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

I don't really have any problems with any of the 40k armies as a whole, the ugliest ones I see are the flat black blobs that keep showing up to game night. You can't even telll what anything on the table is.

I liked the old scrawny goofy looking orks but I can't stand the necron models. I hate everything about them, they are boring, I hate the theme and most of all I hate the stupid green rods. At least when they originally came out you had to paint the gauss guns properly.

Ric Ringo wrote:
I liked the old scrawny goofy looking orks but I can't stand the necron models. I hate everything about them, they are boring, I hate the theme and most of all I hate the stupid green rods. At least when they originally came out you had to paint the gauss guns properly.

Erm I think they always had the green rods? Not a favourite element of the Necrons for me either though i must say

I don't get all the SOB hate. That line had some really characterful models. I have to confess i've not looked at them for a while though so that might just be mostly nostalgia talking

... not that this was a good-looking model either.

Any army painted looks good to me. 1500 points of grey plastic and black primer looks like crap, no matter what the army.

 Wilytank wrote:

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:
On the whole Ork thing though, if people hate Ork Boyz, why not run a ton of Gretchin instead?

...really? You expect people to run around with a ton of T2?

well, considering you can have 180 of them for about 700 points, if you have the patience for painting it, sure

Orks are so ugly. It can't stand it. Kill them all...

Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

I totally disagree with the Dark Eldar being the worst looking army. Their range is amazing, the level of detail is great and the concepts seem to fit together well.

Whilst I don't think the whole army is crap looking, the new Chaos stuff has been really hit and miss for me. That huge monster that is doing the devil horns sign with its hand....it just looks ridiculous.

Some of the other things they've released (the Chaos Space Marines and a few of the Daemons) have been ok though,

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

Kroot. 4 different choises as to what you want. Out side that they all look exactly the same. "yeah these 3 are riding gorillas. These are dogs. These guys with the WWII rifles are my basic and this guy who looks like the rest of them is a special shaper. See? he has his gun above his head!" *snore*

Gotta be Space Marines. The models as a whole aren't that ugly, but the entire range, for me, is just bland and completely devoid of anything interesting. Termies are fairly cool, but that's about it.

Grey Knights take everything silly about SM and exaggerate it. They look like they were designed by a 13 year old.

The new Necron characters and jetbikes imo. The characters have become Tomb Kings in space, losing all of the faceless, implacable Borg style of the previous edition. And the jetbikes... robots on bikes with globes attached to their heads?

Orks. They just look decidedly boring. There doesn't seem to be any dynamism in the models.

~Vryce

Storm troopers. Not the Kasrkin models.

Tyranids.

This might just be me wanting them to be the zerg, but their troops just look way too humanoid.

They're meant to be this super adaptive bug/virus species, but they still need to hold guns. What's the deal with that? Seriously, if GW were to meld those guns into the Tyranid models, they would be perfect.

Special mention to Spess Mehreen tanks.

... have you seen Tyranid models past 2nd edition?

There's only two weapons that are held - the lashwhip and bone sword. Everything else is melded to the Tyranid. Fleshborers and Devourers are borderline - if you look closely, the hands are melded in, but are positioned in a way to make them look held (and the hands 'holding' the barrel area actually hand visible fingers melded through the gun itself, people just don't paint them like that probably because it's an easily missed detail). The reason they also look most distinctly different to the Tyranid is most studio schemes have the gun as a completely different colour to the Tyranids. if you do them the same colour, you can't see where the Tyranid ends and the gun begins.

They actually talked about this with the 3rd edition redesign of Tyranids. They made weapons melded to the Tyranid, but still identifiable as a type of gun or melee weapon simply for gameplay. An opponent looking at an army should be able to see if they're armed with ranged or close combat weapons, and what type of ranged or close combat weapon.

If they went Zerg style, that ease of identification is gone, and opens up to easily cheating by simply stating they have something else.

 Troike wrote:

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

I agree with you about the sisters but I am sure a lot of the male fans fantasize about the sisters so need them to be "pretty"

I think they should be harsh looking because of their fanaticism and scarred up from their wars

-Loki- wrote:if you look closely, the hands are melded in, but are positioned in a way to make them look held (and the hands 'holding' the barrel area actually hand visible fingers melded through the gun itself, people just don't paint them like that probably because it's an easily missed detail).

Can you show us a picture of this? Everything I can find on the internet is either a picture of the right side of the gaunt, or it has the "fingers" painted as such.

I going to take a shot in the dark here, but I'm guessing those who say Orks have never assembled Orks. Especially after seeing:

 Vryce wrote:
Orks. They just look decidedly boring. There doesn't seem to be any dynamism in the models.

 Wilytank wrote:
I going to take a shot in the dark here, but I'm guessing those who say Orks have never assembled Orks. Especially after seeing:

 Vryce wrote:
Orks. They just look decidedly boring. There doesn't seem to be any dynamism in the models.

Agreed. Orks have TONS of bits. I find it hard to believe that you can think that and not think that marines are boring, especially since they all look the same (except for GK) and re just painted differently

Or people just find the junkyard look boring, because people have different opinions?

JWhex wrote:

 Troike wrote:

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

I agree with you about the sisters but I am sure a lot of the male fans fantasize about the sisters so need them to be "pretty"

I think they should be harsh looking because of their fanaticism and scarred up from their wars

Gritty and battle-hardened is fine. The problem is (at least for me) that the porportions are all wacky. They look like really poorly animated cartoon characters.

Definitely Tau. They're a anime fan's wet dream

Dragonzord wrote:

 Wilytank wrote:

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:
On the whole Ork thing though, if people hate Ork Boyz, why not run a ton of Gretchin instead?

...really? You expect people to run around with a ton of T2?

well, considering you can have 180 of them for about 700 points, if you have the patience for painting it, sure

And at the end of the day, one thing remains the same. I'm not stupid enough to hate boyz THAT much.

I don't like the looks of a lot of the daemons units, but dark eldar are worse looking in my opinion.

 -Loki- wrote:
Or people just find the junkyard look boring,

Screw that noise! Twisted Metal in space FTW!

 Wilytank wrote:
I going to take a shot in the dark here, but I'm guessing those who say Orks have never assembled Orks. Especially after seeing:

 Vryce wrote:
Orks. They just look decidedly boring. There doesn't seem to be any dynamism in the models.

I can see that people may not like the junkyard look and the shambled together image of the orks, but saying they lack dynamism, I'm not sure. They definitely have a lot of options and a lot of details on the models.

But on a separate note concerning eldar. I like a lot of the eldar models, but the idea that each unit has its own color scheme, but all have a united color somewhere on the armor makes them look like a hot mess. I love to see eldar armies all painted in the same color. It goes against their fluff but it looks sooo much better. At least IMO

JWhex wrote:

 Troike wrote:

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

I agree with you about the sisters but I am sure a lot of the male fans fantasize about the sisters so need them to be "pretty"

I think they should be harsh looking because of their fanaticism and scarred up from their wars

I wasn't sure if I should bring that point up since it might not go down well, but since you've said it anyway yeah I agree that they do get that sort of thing sometimes purely because they're a mostly female army, which is a shame.

I really hope that GW will keep them "harsh and scarred" if they decide on a redesign.

 asimo77 wrote:


Gritty and battle-hardened is fine. The problem is (at least for me) that the porportions are all wacky. They look like really poorly animated cartoon characters.

Could you be more specific? What 're you seeing on them that makes them look cartoony? Not seeing it myself.

The colour schemes look terrible on some of the codex chapters I've seen, not too keen on Tyranids though either, too hard to find a colour scheme that looks organic and appealing at the same time.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
Tyranids.

This might just be me wanting them to be the zerg, but their troops just look way too humanoid.

They're meant to be this super adaptive bug/virus species, but they still need to hold guns. What's the deal with that? Seriously, if GW were to meld those guns into the Tyranid models, they would be perfect.

Special mention to Spess Mehreen tanks.

This.
Why are they holding guns? They aren't even guns!

I think my least favorite models are the Space Marine flyers from GW (I actually like the FW Storm Eagle and Thunderhawk much better).

 Troike wrote:

JWhex wrote:

 Troike wrote:

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

I agree with you about the sisters but I am sure a lot of the male fans fantasize about the sisters so need them to be "pretty"

I think they should be harsh looking because of their fanaticism and scarred up from their wars

I wasn't sure if I should bring that point up since it might not go down well, but since you've said it anyway yeah I agree that they do get that sort of thing sometimes purely because they're a mostly female army, which is a shame.

I really hope that GW will keep them "harsh and scarred" if they decide on a redesign.

 asimo77 wrote:


Gritty and battle-hardened is fine. The problem is (at least for me) that the porportions are all wacky. They look like really poorly animated cartoon characters.

Could you be more specific? What 're you seeing on them that makes them look cartoony? Not seeing it myself.

Hmm, this may be hard for me to articulate but they all look kind of "stubby". Often the arms and legs look wider than they should be long, also they seem to have large hands, big heads, and short torsos. All this isn't in the sense that they are "not pretty" enough, but it's more that it looks plain unrealistic. The faces don't have to pretty but they went too far in the other direction, you can have a female proportioned head/face but still look grizzled and scarred, for example the noses seem oddly long and the chins and jaws a little too wide.

Also it could be the way they are painted on the GW website. They seem to like to highlight cheekbones which just gives everyone a far too harsh look, but at the the same time they have this bright red lipstick which is just silly. Also I should say after rexamining the line, it's not nearly as bad as I remembered. Hmm, I feel like I'm not explaining my dislike very well you might just have to entertain my intuition I'm afraid. Fwiw I'm ok with the Dark Eldar Wyches and other female models they have (and as aside I'm really surprised some people have picked them as the worst range!). The proportions and scale look more realistic and feminine (not necessarily pretty) and at the same time they look like tough gladiators. I would compare Wyches and SOB to maybe get a better idea of what I think Sisters should look like.

Most boring range: Space Marines. You have your pick of Space Marines with small guns, big guns or chainswords. Pick a color and spray.

Most ugly: Daemons. 3rd and 3.5 Daemons were awesome. The Horrrors were fantastic, the Daemonettes were sexy and the Bloodletters had AXES!!!!!

The current models are terrible. They look like Pokemon. The Plaguebearers are the only exception. Though they look terrible they seem to fit the description better.

The new Daemonettes are garbage. I just can't fathom why anyone would prefer them to the older ones. I really can't. I suppose you could say that they represent Slaaneshs "excess" of sculpting.

For those of you who think Orks are boring.... you've never painted them or are constantly playing against someone who can't paint well. The Orks have more detail and character than any other range.

The new Chaos stuff is a joke. The new Necrons are fine... lacking in something but fine. The Dark Eldar are wonderful.

Anyone making jokes about spikes hasn't built a DE army (they're not all that spikey and most are optional).

The Grey Knights are just... terrible. But I just hate GK in general. Eldar have some good models but are becoming dated. I'm not looking forward to the new release. The new Waithtide is... .

Tyranids are a mixed bag. Some things look cool others look awful. Flying Tyrant is so awesome.

Chaos Marines are also a mixed bag. I really feel they need to go back and fix them up. It would have been so much better if they had made new basic kits instead of Zoids and hellturkeys.

Guard are fine but lack anything that really makes me want to collect them. Same goes for Sisters (I don't understand the dislike. They look fine to me).

All blood angels armys.

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

Beautiful? Graceful? I disagree they should look like soldiers not super models.

 -Loki- wrote:
Or people just find the junkyard look boring, because people have different opinions?

Thats not what I was referring to. I dont care if you think they are boring or not, im just refuting that they dont have any "dynamism", especially compared to other armies.

 Ailaros wrote:

-Loki- wrote:if you look closely, the hands are melded in, but are positioned in a way to make them look held (and the hands 'holding' the barrel area actually hand visible fingers melded through the gun itself, people just don't paint them like that probably because it's an easily missed detail).

Can you show us a picture of this? Everything I can find on the internet is either a picture of the right side of the gaunt, or it has the "fingers" painted as such.

The right side is where you see it.



See the 3 ridges at the bottom of the gun, the two at the top and the single red one near the front, behind the striation (not the eye at the back)? Those are the Termagants fingers. The single red one is the 'thumb'. The trigger hand itself is grown into the gun. It's just given the illusion of being a held gun for ease of recognition.

It's easy to miss - I only just realized it now, and I'm in the process of going back and fixing my Termagants.

JWhex wrote:
The problem with the Diaz demonette models is that GW has always represented the hermaphroditic nature of the demonettes with one male and one female breast, with occasional multiples on one side or the other. His models failed at the conception stage to represent slaanesh despite their appeal to young boys because they have tits on both sides.

The Seeker steeds have a line of boobs down their bellies. ^^

I noticed while I was painting my first Seeker...

Edit: Typo.

Demons. I just don't really care for any of the units. Especially that wannabe defiler thing.

Werewalrus wrote:
Orks. More specifically, the regular Ork Boyz. The Gorilla butt poses have to go.

Orks are fantastic, but I admit their troop poses suck hard. If your local Orks look bad, they're doing Orks wrong.

Or I simply dislike the Orks in general and that includes their looks.

Given your sig I'm not sure I care what you think of Ork asthetics...

 -Loki- wrote:

I really get excited thinking about doing an Ork army, then I remember the Ork Boyz kit and immediately scrap the idea.

Bro, Grot rebels then. Or Nob-only bad boys lists. Or Dread Mob ~ none of these have much in the way of fugly boys poses.

-Loki- wrote:It's easy to miss - I only just realized it now, and I'm in the process of going back and fixing my Termagants.

Sorry, I'm still confused. There aren't any tyranid players nearby that I can look at either.

So is it that the "trigger" hand is fused in and the other hand is holding it, or that both arms are fused together with the gun?

In any case, I'd take your side with this. I don't think that tyranid guns are the most awkward thing. Well, the fact that there is a "clip" on the termagaunt guns is a LITTLE silly...

What? The grey thing? That's because I play the Death Korps, so I paint them grey.

 Ailaros wrote:

-Loki- wrote:It's easy to miss - I only just realized it now, and I'm in the process of going back and fixing my Termagants.

Sorry, I'm still confused. There aren't any tyranid players nearby that I can look at either.

So is it that the "trigger" hand is fused in and the other hand is holding it, or that both arms are fused together with the gun?

Yes, both hands are fused to the gun.

The hand where you would normally be holding the grip and trigger is simply melded to the gun, and the hand that would be supporting the barrel is plugged into the left side. There's not much on that side to show the hand fused to the gun - it's all on the side from the picture I linked. You can see the fingers and thumb, which would normally be under the barrel, are fused into the barrel, and you can see them protuding at certain points.

Basically, Termagants had hands at one point, but when the Fleshborer, a separate organism, is grown onto the Termagant, the hands are fused to the gun.

 Ailaros wrote:
In any case, I'd take your side with this. I don't think that tyranid guns are the most awkward thing. Well, the fact that there is a "clip" on the termagaunt guns is a LITTLE silly...

It is - the other Termagant weapons have different ammo methods. Spinefists seem to generate ammo within the fist itself - there's no external ammo supply. Devourers have the hands similarly fused to the gun, but have an ammo tube running up the length of the arm into the shoulder, suggesting the ammo is stored within the Termagant itself.

I guess you could say the 'clip' on the Fleshborer is just a breeding capsule for Fleshborer beetles. It's, again, just there to make it look more like a gun for ease of recognition for the Tyranid opponent.

Small bug with separate hands with no gun? Termagant with Spinefists.
Small bug with separate hands ending in blades? Hormagaunt.
Small bug with rifle-like weapon with a cone shaped front? Termagant with Devourer.
Small bug with rifle-like weapon with a clip? Termagant with Fleshborer.

You can see where ease of recognition breaks down when they try to meld the weapon too far to the Tyranid itself with Raveners. Spinefists and Devourers mounted in the thorax look incredibly similar, and Deathspitters only look different due to them basically having a vagina in their chest. The only ease of recognition with Raveners is two pairs of Scything Talons or one pair and a pair of Rending Claws.

-Loki- wrote:Basically, Termagants had hands at one point, but when the Fleshborer, a separate organism, is grown onto the Termagant, the hands are fused to the gun.

Oh.

That's kind of neat, actually.

Daemons, had such potential, just look meh to me.

The Great Unclean One is pretty ugly.

Every basic troop model for GW armies in 40k look like they're constipated. Every release for an army I hope they don't do the whole legs-far-apart thing and update their stuff, but no. No matter how cool the army, if their basic troop choice looks like they're having an excellent dump mid-combat, I just can't bear it.

 Tappers wrote:
Every basic troop model for GW armies in 40k look like they're constipated. Every release for an army I hope they don't do the whole legs-far-apart thing and update their stuff, but no. No matter how cool the army, if their basic troop choice looks like they're having an excellent dump mid-combat, I just can't bear it.

Spoiler:

Cannot unsee.

 AtomicEngineer wrote:
Personally what is your least liked army in style? The army that just looks bland, boring or out of place?

For me im going with Slaanesh, they used to have such beautiful models, that reminded me of greek mythology style female demons. Now they are seriously ugly cross dressers with some very boring units like the Farming equipment sorry I mean Seeker Chariots. They just feel and look uninspired and boringly safe. I understand that GW is aiming for a younger demographic now but boobs = bad? come on guys its the 40k!
You play it safe for Slaanesh and you have lost the whole point of the chaos god.

i completely agree. the old daemonettes we so much better

300Spartans1cup wrote:

 AtomicEngineer wrote:
Personally what is your least liked army in style? The army that just looks bland, boring or out of place?

For me im going with Slaanesh, they used to have such beautiful models, that reminded me of greek mythology style female demons. Now they are seriously ugly cross dressers with some very boring units like the Farming equipment sorry I mean Seeker Chariots. They just feel and look uninspired and boringly safe. I understand that GW is aiming for a younger demographic now but boobs = bad? come on guys its the 40k!
You play it safe for Slaanesh and you have lost the whole point of the chaos god.

i completely agree. the old daemonettes we so much better

Was it just for the exposed boobies?

Be honest now.

The worst looking army to me has got to be GW's plastic IG lines.

Cadians wouldn't be so bad if their faces looked like something other than strained constipation (the infantry actually are fine if the heads are swapped)

The Catachans are just...awful, they should have been left to rot in the 90's where their nauseating take GI-Joe/Rambo 80's nostalgia belonged.

I have to say, as much as I'm not a fan of some of the other lines (BA Assault Nipples, Daemons in general) most aren't awful models, they just don't really inspire me.

 Evileyes wrote:
I preferr the new look of daemonettes, we diddn't need more supermodel women in the game, and making them horrific monsters and female to boot, to me made it seem more mature, not less.

Personally, i'm not a fan of the look of Thousand suns, the crazy headcrests just don't do it for me, and I love tzeentch, so having the cult troops not look tzeentchy in my mind, is a bummer.

Agreed. weird pseudo egyptian nonsense? what?
I don't know what Thousand Sons should look like, but certainly not like that.
Ahriman looks so cool! maybe the rest of the army should take a cue from him, I'm ok with curly-q horns and third eyes everywhere.

I personally like pictures that I've seen of the SoB models, but I've never seen one in person.

 Kain wrote:

300Spartans1cup wrote:

 AtomicEngineer wrote:
Personally what is your least liked army in style? The army that just looks bland, boring or out of place?

For me im going with Slaanesh, they used to have such beautiful models, that reminded me of greek mythology style female demons. Now they are seriously ugly cross dressers with some very boring units like the Farming equipment sorry I mean Seeker Chariots. They just feel and look uninspired and boringly safe. I understand that GW is aiming for a younger demographic now but boobs = bad? come on guys its the 40k!
You play it safe for Slaanesh and you have lost the whole point of the chaos god.

i completely agree. the old daemonettes we so much better

Was it just for the exposed boobies?

Be honest now.

Nah they just like outright goofy to me. the only decent model is the head with the crazy hair that goes everywhere imo.

Sisters look pretty terrible too. They dont need to be supermodel but they also don't need to look like butch russian woman stereotype face.

I think the best is Tyranids, they look like stuff out of nightmares. They are like the Zerg but 10x scarier, both in fluff and in look.

Space Marines are pretty bland until you start getting into the different factiosn that have a specific style to them. I do also like the new Necon Models. Especially the new wraiths.

I also really enjoy Tau but that's the just mech lover in me. I plan on making a Black Knights themed Tau army. (Code Geass)

 Kain wrote:

300Spartans1cup wrote:

 AtomicEngineer wrote:
Personally what is your least liked army in style? The army that just looks bland, boring or out of place?

For me im going with Slaanesh, they used to have such beautiful models, that reminded me of greek mythology style female demons. Now they are seriously ugly cross dressers with some very boring units like the Farming equipment sorry I mean Seeker Chariots. They just feel and look uninspired and boringly safe. I understand that GW is aiming for a younger demographic now but boobs = bad? come on guys its the 40k!
You play it safe for Slaanesh and you have lost the whole point of the chaos god.

i completely agree. the old daemonettes we so much better

Was it just for the exposed boobies?

Be honest now.

Yes. Because Daemonettes are the the aspects of pleasure, pain and excess. Pleasure to look at. Leather, thongs and knives for pain. Excessive boobies.

The new ones are Pleasure to avoid buying. Painful to look at. Excessively ugly.

There is only one way I can accept them.

Daemonettes are sexy and alluring until you get close. The old Diaz Daemonettes are the alluring beauties. The new ones are the one you see a moment before they gut you.

 Kain wrote:

 Tappers wrote:
Every basic troop model for GW armies in 40k look like they're constipated. Every release for an army I hope they don't do the whole legs-far-apart thing and update their stuff, but no. No matter how cool the army, if their basic troop choice looks like they're having an excellent dump mid-combat, I just can't bear it.

Spoiler:

Cannot unsee.

Yeah, thanks for ruining grimdark you .
Just kidding, that's hilarious

I really don't like IG models at all. With the exception of vehicles.

 Kain wrote:

300Spartans1cup wrote:

 AtomicEngineer wrote:
Personally what is your least liked army in style? The army that just looks bland, boring or out of place?

For me im going with Slaanesh, they used to have such beautiful models, that reminded me of greek mythology style female demons. Now they are seriously ugly cross dressers with some very boring units like the Farming equipment sorry I mean Seeker Chariots. They just feel and look uninspired and boringly safe. I understand that GW is aiming for a younger demographic now but boobs = bad? come on guys its the 40k!
You play it safe for Slaanesh and you have lost the whole point of the chaos god.

i completely agree. the old daemonettes we so much better

Was it just for the exposed boobies?

Be honest now.

No. Not for me.

It was also the more curvy, hyperfeminine figure. I should mention I used curvy there to refer to the natural curves of the female human form, rather than the more modern usage to refer to a heavier woman.

But, I'd feel really way too embarrassed about even ORDERING the Juan Diaz daemonettes, much less painting them, much less playing a game with them, much less playing a game with them with my mom.

The new plastics? The reduced sex appeal makes me a lot more comfortable owning them. : D

As for my opinion on worst looking army? Nurgle Daemons. No question. When the new models came out, I was looking at them in White Dwarf, and they made me sick to my stomach. Like, nauseous.

I think it's silly to say boobs and overtly feminine parts are the the only ways to represent lust and Slaanesh. I mean giant penises would be just as fitting as six breasts and just as gratuitous. Enforcing a male heterosexual only view on pleasure/lust onto the models is pretty exclusionary, maybe sexist, and very un-Slaaneshi. Besides, Slaanesh is only sex on the surface, it's more about insidious depravity, perfectionism, hedonism, and ultimatley self destruction.

The half-male half-female look of the new Daemonettes is much more in line with "broadening your horizons" which Slaanesh is all for, new expeiences and all that.

Besides the lack of extraneous mammaires the new Daemonettes are just as curvy but also have enough scary bits to remind you that they are soul-sucking demons too. Also I don't understand why people think the old Daemonettes were alluring: blank, noseless, fish-eyed faces; talons, crab claws, and 3 pairs of breasts are creepy and weird not erotic. Though Slaanesh should be creepy like eroticism gone wrong, which is exactly what the new ones do.

 asimo77 wrote:
I think it's silly to say boobs and overtly feminine parts are the the only ways to represent lust and Slaanesh. I mean giant penises would be just as fitting as six breasts and just as gratuitous. Enforcing a male heterosexual only view on pleasure/lust onto the models is pretty exclusionary, maybe sexist, and very un-Slaaneshi. Besides, Slaanesh is only sex on the surface, it's more about insidious depravity, perfectionism, hedonism, and ultimatley self destruction.

The half-male half-female look of the new Daemonettes is much more in line with "broadening your horizons" which Slaanesh is all for, new expeiences and all that.

Besides the lack of extraneous mammaires the new Daemonettes are just as curvy but also have enough scary bits to remind you that they are soul-sucking demons too. Also I don't understand why people think the old Daemonettes were alluring: blank, noseless, fish-eyed faces; talons, crab claws, and 3 pairs of breasts are creepy and weird not erotic. Though Slaanesh should be creepy like eroticism gone wrong, which is exactly what the new ones do.

I actually like the new Daemonette models. I have a Slaaneshi Daemons army on the shelf composed entirely of the new plastics (and a metal Masque I got before I understood). ^^

And... Well, you're talking to a guy who, ahem, enjoys artwork of animal people. Juan Diaz Daemonettes don't even come close to that. Even the newer daemonettes aren't as weird and creepy as some of the other stuff I've seen and sometimes enjoyed.

I still think Nurgle looks worse. But that's based on my stomach turning when I look at their models. But then, that's their entire premise, so maybe job well done.

Oh my post wasn't necessarily directed at you, just musings on the Daemonette dilemma in general.

Necrons = boring to me, the worst by far.

Nurgle daemons just look bad. I don't think they do justice for that they're supposed to be. They have so much potential to be a lot scarier.

It's Necrons for me as well. Just look boring, really can't see myself ever wanting to collect them.

I dunno, I don't like new daemonettes, but the Bloodletters just look fun to me.
I agree with the gorilla butt Orks, so bad!! This might just be me, but I wish orks were just a tiny bit more intimidating/stood tall. They are supposed to be bigger or as big as Space Marines, but they look the size of IG.

I think that with a new update the new Tyranid models there will be :
- big models, it seems to be ascending with 40K new releases (Daemon Engine CSM, shrine thingies (Daemons), floating pope mobile (DA), Riptide (Tau) and Wraithknight (Eldar)
- very spiky

Although I like and play necrons, I think the Necrons Warriors need a little individuality, or at least every pack came with a Sergeant/lord that looked different.

However my most hated model will probably be generic CSM and cultists. While I like the idea of Chaos and most of the new models, the generic CSM dudes are too smooth and not Chaosey/spikey enough, and cultists all look the same...

P.S. fantasy: i prefer the old empire models that had their spears/halberds pointing up - makes a much better silhouette and the new models are so hard to bunch up

Catachans.



That is all.

 BryllCream wrote:
Catachans.



That is all.

Why when I see this, do I think of popeye? Give him a little pipe someone, please xD

it would actually be very easy to give him a little pipe and paint him in pop-eye colours. 100 internets to the first person to make an entire army of popeye catachans

I like 90% of every model range that isn't hideously outdated (100 for nids and crons) but if I had to pick on some one it would be slaneesh as they are pretty much the only race barring SOB that I don't own a single model for.

 BryllCream wrote:
Catachans.



That is all.

That's not bad. Also, any model range that includes this is auto-awesome.

 BryllCream wrote:
it would actually be very easy to give him a little pipe and paint him in pop-eye colours. 100 internets to the first person to make an entire army of popeye catachans

This must happen. Seriously.

"Carnifex? Oil beat'ya with me fists! A-gah-gah-gah-gah-gah-gah!"

Just a bunch of this model over and over, with a bunch of tin-can's scattered on the bases

 Troike wrote:

JWhex wrote:

 Troike wrote:

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

I agree with you about the sisters but I am sure a lot of the male fans fantasize about the sisters so need them to be "pretty"

I think they should be harsh looking because of their fanaticism and scarred up from their wars

I wasn't sure if I should bring that point up since it might not go down well, but since you've said it anyway yeah I agree that they do get that sort of thing sometimes purely because they're a mostly female army, which is a shame.

I really hope that GW will keep them "harsh and scarred" if they decide on a redesign.

 asimo77 wrote:


Gritty and battle-hardened is fine. The problem is (at least for me) that the porportions are all wacky. They look like really poorly animated cartoon characters.

Could you be more specific? What 're you seeing on them that makes them look cartoony? Not seeing it myself.

I would prefer some more elegant sisters. If you played dawn of war they seemed to have more grace to them. they dont need to have massive tits hanging out or anything but the current angry lesbians with a bondage fetish is about as terrible as it could possibly be.

I dont get the dark eldar witches either. theyre the most ugly looking drow elves ive ever seen. does their fluff say that theyre supposed to be bodybuilder women on steroids or something??

Come on guys,leave my beloved baby ogryns alone.As for ugly check out this,oh yeah it's in finecast too WTF.

kb305 wrote:

 Troike wrote:

JWhex wrote:

 Troike wrote:

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

I agree with you about the sisters but I am sure a lot of the male fans fantasize about the sisters so need them to be "pretty"

I think they should be harsh looking because of their fanaticism and scarred up from their wars

I wasn't sure if I should bring that point up since it might not go down well, but since you've said it anyway yeah I agree that they do get that sort of thing sometimes purely because they're a mostly female army, which is a shame.

I really hope that GW will keep them "harsh and scarred" if they decide on a redesign.

 asimo77 wrote:


Gritty and battle-hardened is fine. The problem is (at least for me) that the porportions are all wacky. They look like really poorly animated cartoon characters.

Could you be more specific? What 're you seeing on them that makes them look cartoony? Not seeing it myself.

I would prefer some more elegant sisters. If you played dawn of war they seemed to have more grace to them. they dont need to have massive tits hanging out or anything but the current angry lesbians with a bondage fetish is about as terrible as it could possibly be.

I thought the Catholic church has been sexy for a long time now.

My top 3 worst looking armies: Imperial Guard, Chaos Daemons and Sisters of Battle

My top 3 best looking armies: Dark Eldar, Nicely Painted CSMs and Eldar.

Of course I am not biased

When it comes to the daemonettes, it's all in what the pose says.

The Diaz models say; "I dance on air, mesmerize the weak, and slaughter with equal parts lust and joy"

The new ones say; "When is that bus coming?"

I gotta say.. Eldar :/ Many of the sculpts are SO old! And all the Phoenix Lords have that weird squatting pose from like.. 3rd Ed .-. They just don't seem to look right

kb305 wrote:
I dont get the dark eldar witches either. theyre the most ugly looking drow elves ive ever seen. does their fluff say that theyre supposed to be bodybuilder women on steroids or something??

Yes. They are infact bodybuilding women on steroids.

 DeffDred wrote:

kb305 wrote:
I dont get the dark eldar witches either. theyre the most ugly looking drow elves ive ever seen. does their fluff say that theyre supposed to be bodybuilder women on steroids or something??

Yes. They are infact bodybuilding women on steroids.

grose

the kabalites look great atleast

kb305 wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:

kb305 wrote:
I dont get the dark eldar witches either. theyre the most ugly looking drow elves ive ever seen. does their fluff say that theyre supposed to be bodybuilder women on steroids or something??

Yes. They are infact bodybuilding women on steroids.

grose

the kabalites look great atleast

LOL, yeah but the Wyches look fine too. They just have male arms. If they had made an extra set of female arms they wouldn't look so butch.

But as far as the fluff goes it fits perfectly.

Orcs.

 Mythra wrote:
Orcs.

Orks*

kb305 wrote:

 Troike wrote:

JWhex wrote:

 Troike wrote:

Daniel_Holmes wrote:
Sisters of Battle. I want a SoB army so bad but to me the SoB should be beautiful, graceful, etc, and the current (if you can even use 'current' and SoB in the same sentence) models are just... hideous.

I look forward to the day they redo the SoB... if ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Sisters. Their normal troops look fugly.

Nah. Sisters aren't supposed to be pretty. They're dedicated soldiers who see a lot of combat, it makes sense for them to not be attractive.

Anyway, my vote goes to the Nurgle Daemons. But in a good way. Their models do a great job of representing what a plague god's forces would look like.

Plaguebearers creep me out.

I agree with you about the sisters but I am sure a lot of the male fans fantasize about the sisters so need them to be "pretty"

I think they should be harsh looking because of their fanaticism and scarred up from their wars

I wasn't sure if I should bring that point up since it might not go down well, but since you've said it anyway yeah I agree that they do get that sort of thing sometimes purely because they're a mostly female army, which is a shame.

I really hope that GW will keep them "harsh and scarred" if they decide on a redesign.

 asimo77 wrote:


Gritty and battle-hardened is fine. The problem is (at least for me) that the porportions are all wacky. They look like really poorly animated cartoon characters.

Could you be more specific? What 're you seeing on them that makes them look cartoony? Not seeing it myself.

I would prefer some more elegant sisters. If you played dawn of war they seemed to have more grace to them. they dont need to have massive tits hanging out or anything but the current angry lesbians with a bondage fetish is about as terrible as it could possibly be.

I dont get the dark eldar witches either. theyre the most ugly looking drow elves ive ever seen. does their fluff say that theyre supposed to be bodybuilder women on steroids or something??

Eh. Just don't think that grace suits them at all. They're hardened soldiers, and when they're not fighting wars, they're training to fight them or praying. I don't think that just because they're women they should have any expectations of being graceful or whatever put on them.

Soulstorm's Sister's were allright, though. If GW itself is taking this stance, then Soulstorm-eque Sisters would be acceptable.

And where the heck did you get that they're all lesbians from? Just becuase they're fairly unattractive? Though I'll admit, I'm sort of with you on the repentias. Sure their attire suits their fluff, but it cleaves a little close to fetishistic for me. Maybe give them some simple robes instead?

 asimo77 wrote:
but at the the same time they have this bright red lipstick which is just silly

Not particulalry seeing the rest of what you're saying, but yes their lips on the GW website are awful! They look fine with Pink Horror lips, though.

The current Slaanesh models are miserable across the board. Pretty much nothing conveys lust or excess. NOTHING. It's like one of their defining features is crab claws...???

Raumkampfer wrote:
The current Slaanesh models are miserable across the board. Pretty much nothing conveys lust or excess. NOTHING. It's like one of their defining features is crab claws...???

They make you lust for Diaz versions to make a return and they are excessively ugly.

 Troike wrote:

Eh. Just don't think that grace suits them at all. They're hardened soldiers, and when they're not fighting wars, they're training to fight them or praying. I don't think that just because they're women they should have any expectations of being graceful or whatever put on them.

Soulstorm's Sister's were allright, though. If GW itself is taking this stance, then Soulstorm-eque Sisters would be acceptable.

And where the heck did you get that they're all lesbians from? Just becuase they're fairly unattractive? Though I'll admit, I'm sort of with you on the repentias. Sure their attire suits their fluff, but it cleaves a little close to fetishistic for me. Maybe give them some simple robes instead?

In regards to the Repentia, I could definitely go for them having cloth robes. No armor though, they are basically a repent-by-death-in-battle unit. Also, perhaps a hood like the DA vets have, so GW's sculptors don't have to create bondage masks or shaven heads. Plus I think it'd look nice with the robe. And more importantly on the hood, we could kitbash those heads onto power armored Sisters.

But then we'd have to ignore all the previous art of Repentia. Of course, the previous art of Repentia pretty much universally shows scrolls sewn onto their bodies, even onto their tongues and... more tender areas. Fortunately, that's not represented on the models.

 Icculus wrote:
I'm probably alone on in this one but I think the imperial guard infantry armies look so boring. I like this game for the high fantasy and future tech, and then someone comes In With their ww2 IG. On the other hand, the tank models are pretty cool and a mech guard army does catch my eye.

You aren't alone: I think IG infantry look like gak. Sure, paint jobs on them can be great, but the models themselves are boring and crappy. Tanks are cool though. I also hate Fire Warrior helmets and shoulder pads. Everything else is great on them. Not a huge fan of Crisis suits either.

 DeffDred wrote:

Raumkampfer wrote:
The current Slaanesh models are miserable across the board. Pretty much nothing conveys lust or excess. NOTHING. It's like one of their defining features is crab claws...???

They make you lust for Diaz versions to make a return and they are excessively ugly.

Hehe, don't you get it? LUST. That may have been the best pun I have ever read!

For e, the new (not really new) plastic Catachan models. The older metal ones are better by far. The only down side with the metal catachans is you get one pose with special weapons.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat660004a&prodId=prod1300014a

This - end of discussion!

Craftworld Iyanden.

Chock up another vote for sisters. Their models look worse than some aborted fetuses that I've seen. Their vehicles are mutated versions of space marine tanks, but with the chaos marines problem that it looks like someone just dumped a load of laundry on top of the nice clean rhino. Its like someone sat down to design it and never fething stopped adding bits. Then we get to the issue of their infantry. Aside from being sloppy poorly rendered figures, they have arbitrary tits nailed to their power armor for what reason exactly? Women in service don't have corset shaped flack jackets, what purpose dose wearing their bra on the outside accomplish? Then there's the BDSM clad sisters, that are suppose to be what exactly? Ultra devout worshipers of the emperor's johnson?

Y'know, for being a total anime and even mecha fan, I really can't stand most Tau models. I know I should like them, I'm totally their target demographic, yet I just can't get into basically any of the range. I don't care for fire warriors, battlesuits don't trigger any mecha fanboyism, the tanks do nothing for me.

I really like SoB artwork, but till the model range gets plastic kits that are better than the current line, I can't see myself buying any.

I absolutely love space marines chaos or imperial!!! How can you not? This is probably going to make me unpopular with the recent update and all that but I can not for the life of me bring myself to like the eldar. Dark eldar? yes I like them but eldar? NO!! The rest of the xenos stuff is fine tyranids,dark eldar,tau,orks and necrons i like them, but eldar just seem boring to look at (well to me they do anyway). My apologies to any eldar players i have offended.

Ultramarines. Plain models, uninspired color scheme, not much customization.

Catachan's. Their arms are just silly looking. If they were sized correctly, I think they'd be an interesting army, though.

^ What he said. Roided up rambos and my personal vision of the Grim Darkness of the Far Future don't mix.

Also, pre-update necrons. The Monolith, to be exact. A flat, big shoebox standing upright with a wiggly-wobbly-timey-whimey mystery door on one side and a plastic green diamond on top looks like many things, a kids' jewelry case amongst them, but certainly not like a futuristic alien armored vehicle. GW's crowning moment of blandness IMO.

Worst
#1 Necrons: Many of their models look the same, just some variation of "emotionless metal statue" or "differently shaped flying hieroglyph", typically a boring paint job though when they're done in a scheme that isn't black and green and metal they can look pretty cool.

#2 Imperial Guard: I personally have a hugely different opinion to the above posters, in that I find the Imperial Guard to be amongst the most interesting factions. Sadly though, their infantry look bland and undersized, and their armies are generally just made up of a dozen differently sized mud coloured vehicles. Dull as hell.

#3 Space Marines: Very little personality on the models, lots of wide open bits with chapter colour on them and little detail. Boring.

Best
#1 Orks: The models have buckets of personality and most players add their own on top of that. However, their basic infantry are amongst the worst in the game IMO (forementioned Gorilla Ass poses, and little variety of models). Not a big fan of many of their vehicles either. But for me, personality is king and this faction has it in spades.

#2 TIE Eldar/CSM: Less the actual models of the army, which are a mixed bag, but rather the fact that for some reason these two armies in my area get some incredible paintjobs.

Half the Eldar range, Jet Bikes, Warp Spiders, they just need updating, especially since they have just had a new codex it is crazy how outdated some of thier units are.

I'd Say normal Space marines are pretty boring and ive never been a fan I just think they look too similar and there is little way to make them all look different from each other, but the SoB are bad they just don't look the way you imagine them when you hear the name and it's kind of a let down , the Eldar Are ok there are some good models there but the colour scheme's I've seen are pretty bland normally just One Colour for the body then a different for the helmet. But quite a few of the Armies look nice and there are definitely more good ones than bad ones

Orks are the worst. They're like green smurfs with big teeth and guns and stuff. Might have liked them if I was still 9 years old.

Tyranids grouped together in a swarm just looks boring to me. It looks very plain but then again I have only seen about 3 tyrannic armys and I hate them (not just because of the look). So if you can show me a good Tyranid army, I'll be impressed.

I've still got any armies' worth of those old dumping Orks, got 'em for free from a mate, I'll respray them eventually. Probably.

I think Imperial Fists look terrible. But I'm not a fan of yellow, although I think Eldar can pull it off okay.

That's more of just a color scheme issue though.

I like the models for pretty much every 40k army. I think IG and Daemons are the two weakest though. IG aren't sci-fi enough for me, and Daemons are just missing something.

Death Korps look awesome though. If I was a millionaire, I'd pay off my house, set a chunk aside for kids college, and buy a nicer car. If I was a multi-millionaire, I'd do all of that and start a Death Korps army.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
40k:

ATM it's chaos for me, because the entire range is spread across several aesthetics, designs and about 15 years of minis. Together on a table, the whole thing looks messy for me, not least of all for the 'hey, we put spike on our gak!' half hearted sculpting/modeling that's gone on.

The Dark Vengence set and several of the minis that came out around the same time were a great improvement on the prior 'horns n spike' marines, but without a reworked rank and file kit, no go.

I agree completely with this. I want to start a chaos army, i do so bad. But the model range is just so half assed. The dark Vengence style looks like how CSM should look, beautiful sculpts. Sooooo where is the rest of the army?

Necrons and dark eldar got beautiful new ranges when they re-released. All with a cohesive look. then comes 6th edition and GW just says "buy more $80 monsters, but keep playing with your 15 year old turd miniatures for the rest of the army."

After seeing the old daemonette models, I'd have to say I dislike the new ones.

But I do dislike the Necrons, but that's just personal opinions because I'm not fond of metallic skeleton-walkers. I mean it's insanely cool, but with the models themselves, I don't find appealing. I do really like the robots, like the Canoptek Spiders and the like.

The new necrons are very bland to look at. All I wanted was a terminator sized model for them, like upgrade the immortals size to about the same as a space marine terminator, have them carry a big heavy gause gun but nope. All the necron units look the same (I know they are meant to) but they could have given them a little variety. All they did is throw in different guns into the sets.

'nids with RIFLES. WITH MAGAZINES AND BARRELS.

/thread

Pretty much all space marine stuff. The infantry is passable, the vehicles and bikes are horrid.

Catachans take the cake. Bloated, horrible proportions, no armor.

Sisters without helmets I don't like. Their helmeted looks pretty cool though. Not my favorite army aesthetic, but far from the worst. Sisters have some really cool figs in their range. Of course, they also have some of the worst (Dialogus, lol), but that's not the army's fault.

Dislike the Dark Eldar, but just because they overplayed the Evil Elf Space Fetishist theme way, way too much. Some Dark Eldar models are cool, others (Wyches, Wracks, Scourges, Hellions, Mandrakes, Jabba the Hutt Skiff) are just plain awful. It's really just an overall terrible aesthetic for the army.

 Razak wrote:
Tyranids grouped together in a swarm just looks boring to me. It looks very plain but then again I have only seen about 3 tyrannic armys and I hate them (not just because of the look). So if you can show me a good Tyranid army, I'll be impressed.

If this doesn't do it for you, you're pretty much not going to like Tyranids,

The IG's - why do the fully flakk armoured cadians have the same cover save as the rambo's??

THEORY: what if the lumps of muscle on the arms are actually flakk armour, and we've just been painting them wrong for years haha


I personally really don't like the new Eldar models, especially the wraithknight - it looks so much like a kids toy, I ( an eldar player ) am going to have to buy it or forget eldar if i ever want to win a game once all the other codexes are updated, if I ever do buy it, i'll also have to buy a special army case for just that model ( if i wanted Titans i would buy Forge World, and PLAY APOCALYPSE ).



...and it's £70


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the Chaos Space Marines set is getting a bit old - the only change since 4th edition is they took out the cool chaos mutations sprue

New Daemons for me, the only thing I quite like from the recent releases is the Seeker Chariot. Pretty much everything else has been a big step backwards, to the point where I threw out my plastic Daemonettes because I found them so boring [have replaced with Ebayed big claws]. And I disagree with what a lot of people said - Slaanesh is ALL about boobs! Much prefer the old Plaguebearers, Pink Horrors, etc. etc.

Interesting how a lot of the models people have said they don't like are the ones I love. Sisters for me are probably the best looking army out there and I really like the old Dark Eldar models [got about 2k points worth for next to nothing on Ebay too ]. Maybe it's an age thing? I like the older models which had a sense of humour in the way they were modeled, maybe you young folk like everything to be GrimDark because this game should be taken seriously God damn it!

 Jacknife wrote:
The IG's - why do the fully flakk armoured cadians have the same cover save as the rambo's??

THEORY: what if the lumps of muscle on the arms are actually flakk armour, and we've just been painting them wrong for years haha


I personally really don't like the new Eldar models, especially the wraithknight - it looks so much like a kids toy, I ( an eldar player ) am going to have to buy it or forget eldar if i ever want to win a game once all the other codexes are updated, if I ever do buy it, i'll also have to buy a special army case for just that model ( if i wanted Titans i would buy Forge World, and PLAY APOCALYPSE ).

From what I'e seen a lot of people are actually saying the new wraithknight isn't worth taking. It is tough and everything, but it still has a 3+ armour save and no invulnerable. Also it can have guns coming out of its ass but it can still only fire 2 every turn. A lot of people have explained it's shortcomings better than me in other threads but it is definitely not the new helldrake!

KaiyaA wrote:

 Jacknife wrote:

I personally really don't like the new Eldar models, especially the wraithknight - it looks so much like a kids toy, I ( an eldar player ) am going to have to buy it or forget eldar if i ever want to win a game once all the other codexes are updated, if I ever do buy it, i'll also have to buy a special army case for just that model ( if i wanted Titans i would buy Forge World, and PLAY APOCALYPSE ).

From what I'e seen a lot of people are actually saying the new wraithknight isn't worth taking. It is tough and everything, but it still has a 3+ armour save and no invulnerable. Also it can have guns coming out of its ass but it can still only fire 2 every turn. A lot of people have explained it's shortcomings better than me in other threads but it is definitely not the new helldrake!

I haven't seen the codex yet, or seen the reviews, I based that on the DK and the riptide.
Hopefully one of the nice looking fliers will be the new Eldar 'auto-take'

I find regular Space Marines bland and boring and don't feel really inspired by any of their HQ characters. Only unit that I like are the Legion of the Damned.

Chaos, well it's just the nurlge I don't think I could paint with all the gore.

Tau. Generally I don't like the Tau. I don't think they fit in with the darkness of 40K. But I do like the Kroot models and painting makes a big difference with Tau. I've seen some wonderful painted Tau armies that nearly made them look appealing.

I was discussing the appearence of the Sisters with somebody on /tg/ recently, and he convinced me to soften my stance a little. They used Sister Miriya as an example, actually.



How would everybody feel about something like this as a new look for the Sisters? Not as "ugly" as the current models, but doesn't look less soldier-y. Strong chin, scar, ect. Seems like a nice balance between the two viewpoints.

 Troike wrote:
I was discussing the appearence of the Sisters with somebody on /tg/ recently, and he convinced me to soften my stance a little. They used Sister Miriya as an example, actually.

Spoiler:

How would everybody feel about something like this as a new look for the Sisters? Not as "ugly" as the current models, but doesn't look less soldier-y. Strong chin, scar, ect. Seems like a nice balance between the two viewpoints.

That'd work fine for me. ^^

If they got Sisters plastics looking like that, I'd start an army of them.

 -Loki- wrote:
If they got Sisters plastics looking like that, I'd start an army of them.

I'd replace my whole army of metal Sisters with them. : D

Not just because it means scalies and furries, either! ^^

At the moment its Chaos daemons. I just don't like anything about them in their current style.