Gwaihir - AUD$70

*falls off chair laughing*

What a rip!

Did the eagles really have bright orange feet in the film?

Looks kinda dumb.....

 DiabolicAl wrote:
Did the eagles really have bright orange feet in the film?

Looks kinda dumb.....

I was thinking that, I know they have yellow feet, well some species at least

 DiabolicAl wrote:
Did the eagles really have bright orange feet in the film?

Looks kinda dumb.....

No, their feet are yellow in the film. Pretty much everything other than the dwarves has had questionable colour choices but I expect these were painted before the painters had seen the film (although the eagles were at the end of the LotR trilogy). It's the same with the trolls. THere's a pre production image of them with similar coloured skin as the GW painters have used but in the film they seem closer to the colour of the cave troll in The Fellowship of the Ring. Admittedly that scene is by firelight but thats how I interpreted them.

For me the eagle are ok but I will be interested to see how the wood elf or high elf eagles look as the Warhammer stuff tend to be a bit more stylised. I'm still unsure about the wargs as they seem bulkier in the film but then I guess that's compared to Dwarves. I'm curious about how the white warg and Azog will look as his warg seemed more like a cross between a tiger and a wolf.

Who is stupid enough to buy Gwahir when you can get 2 Giant Eagles too?

Guys who like 3 different eagles?

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
Guys who like 3 different eagles?

Aka 0 conversion skills :O

Precisely, but unless the kit is different from other LOTR kits apart from maybe theEnt and Troll, then the chances are that the kit will offer few options.

Here are some alternative eagles with reasonable prices: http://gamezoneminiatures.de/elfen.html

Apparently the eagle leader is bigger than the other two, I'd buy it just because it'll look different than the first two and their variants.

Here are the advanced orders for Feb.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCatsLarge.jsp?catId=cat970003a&rootCatGameStyle=athletic

Enjoy.

No, no it must be a mistake. It can't be £25, it just can't. That's, that's not possible!

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat970013a&prodId=prod1830008a

But, but no...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat970013a&prodId=prod1870036a

What.....

Were you expecting it to be more expensive then?

At the end of the day, who's going to buy it when you get the Goblin King in the box.

Gah. I actually want those Knights of Rivendell...

Same, and proably yazneg. as i want a large Gundabad Force

Also, i love the fact the rivendell knights come with casutlys for thrown riders! Awsome touch.

Those prices...

Rivendell knights are really nice but at $10 a pop it just 'aint happening!

 Commander Cain wrote:
Those prices...

Rivendell knights are really nice but at $10 a pop it just 'aint happening!

Yep.
And I was so excited about them

Just to point out how bad the pricing is over here, the foot and mounted finecast Elrond with the terrible faces are $70, this is a much nicer 75mm Elrond http://www.knightmodels.com/product.php?id_product=137 that, once converted, is $71au

Whoa. I never knew knight models sold lotr stuff. That Elrond is stunning!

Yep, they all are, I can't wait for a Gimli model.

Elrond? AUD$70?

Oh dear Lord these prices are pure comedy gold.

what happened to the €26 cavalry boxes!? seriously....€40 for thouse knights? i knew GW was expensive but those Hobbit prices are ridiculous!
i was looking forward to the knights, but right now i doubt wether i'll even buy anything at all

 blood reaper wrote:

Spoiler:

No, no it must be a mistake. It can't be £25, it just can't. That's, that's not possible!

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat970013a&prodId=prod1830008a

But, but no...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat970013a&prodId=prod1870036a

What.....

I don't get their pricing - £20 for 12 armoured dwarves sounds about right, £12 for Finecast Radagast, sounds about right but £25 for the Goblin King and £30 for 6 knights is just beyond ridiculous!

I've ordered Yazneg because I like the look of it, and it'll go with my Wild Wargs, Fimbul the Hunter and Hunter Orcs on Fell Wargs I've got


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 supremeoverlordVECT wrote:
what happened to the €26 cavalry boxes!? seriously....€40 for thouse knights? i knew GW was expensive but those Hobbit prices are ridiculous!
i was looking forward to the knights, but right now i doubt wether i'll even buy anything at all

Imagine if you're a Warhammer Fantasy and a LOTR player, you're gonna have to start selling body organs to pay for them!

 supremeoverlordVECT wrote:
what happened to the €26 cavalry boxes!? seriously....€40 for thouse knights? i knew GW was expensive but those Hobbit prices are ridiculous!
i was looking forward to the knights, but right now i doubt wether i'll even buy anything at all

$30 a box...$5 a model
* Knights of Minus Tirith (plastic)
* Riders of Rohan (plastic)
* Warg Riders (plastic)
* Haradrim Raiders (plastic)

$38 a box...$6.33 a model
* Knights of Lothlorien (Galadhrim Knights) (plastic)
* Easterling Kataphrakts (metal?)
* Morgul Knights (plastic)

$50 a box...$8.30 a model
* Khandish Horsemen (metal?)
* Serpent Riders (metal?)
* Knights of Rivendell (plastic)

Can't figure out the pricing scheme either...

And I now fondly remember the good old days when Riders, Rohen, and Wargs were $20 and $25 a box.

Khandish Horsemen and Serpent Riders are metal models. Easterling Kataphrakts are now, thank goodness, plastic.

New hobbits release list;

The Hobbit - Warriors of Erebor

This box contains a plastic kit that makes twelve individually posed Warriors of Erebor – grim Dwarven fighters

The Hobbit -Warriors of Dale

This box contains a plastic kit that makes 10 dynamically posed Warriors
The rules for using collections of these warriors are included in their box

Finecast
The Hobbit - Grim Hammer Captain

A clampack that contains one highly detailed Citadel Finecast resin miniature



The Hobbit - Thror

A clampack that contains one highly detailed Citadel Finecast resin miniature



The Hobbit - Lindir

A clampack that contains one highly detailed Citadel Finecast resin miniature

Note: These will be released at the end of februrary

Rules in the box eh ?

... perilously close to a sensible decision/move there !

 reds8n wrote:
Rules in the box eh ?

... perilously close to a sensible decision/move there !

That or they got the models ready to go and realized they left them out of the rulebook.

They might not have been allowed to put rules/references to "The Men of Dale" into the book on the grounds of "Spoilers".

That's the only non-crazypants reasoning I can come up with.

I'd really like the Radagast because he was one of my favourite characters in the film, but I'm not buying Finecast. No way at all, even if I could stomach paying £12 for a single 28mm figure, it would have to be metal.

I like the set of 'Grim Hammers' Dwarves. Although they don't look quite as nice as when I saw the first photos of them, so I'm not sure now. Still, I'm a bit disappointed that as they are LotR infantry, it'll be a single sprue in the box. Which isn't very satisfying for £20. When LotR first came out, about 10 years ago admittedly, you got two sprues of 12 men, totalling 24, in a box for £12, now it's half that content for £20.

When this Hobbit fad passes I'll keep my eye open at wargames shows, LotR stuff has been pretty easy to pick up cheap at events I've been to.

That's another February release not mentioned in the WD. Weird.

It is more like end of februray/march release.

Okay, recalculated: 23rd Februars preorder, 2nd March release.

Here an edited release list for easier reading:

Plastic Kits

The Hobbit - Warriors of Erebor
This box contains a plastic kit that makes twelve individually posed Warriors of Erebor – grim Dwarven fighters

The Hobbit -Warriors of Dale
This box contains a plastic kit that makes 10 dynamically posed Warriors.
The rules for using collections of these warriors are included in their box.



Finecast

The Hobbit - Grim Hammer Captain
A clampack that contains one highly detailed Citadel Finecast resin miniature

The Hobbit - Thror
A clampack that contains one highly detailed Citadel Finecast resin miniature

The Hobbit - Lindir
A clampack that contains one highly detailed Citadel Finecast resin miniature

Huh, just noticed that in addition to having the rules in the box the warriors of Dale are 10 in a box. As far as I am aware LotR/Hobbit has always been frames of 12.

Also they are 10 dynamically posed warriors, where the warriors of Erebor are individually posed. It isn't much but they clearly ctrl+C/ctrl+V'd the finecast descriptions, why are they not doing the same with the plastics?

I thought demons were up for preorder on the 23rd?

 gianlucafiorentini123 wrote:
I thought demons were up for preorder on the 23rd?

Both can be released at the same time.

 gianlucafiorentini123 wrote:
I thought demons were up for preorder on the 23rd?

All of the Hobbit releases are in addition to Warhammer / Warhammer 40,000 book releases each month.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
I'd really like the Radagast because he was one of my favourite characters in the film, but I'm not buying Finecast. No way at all, even if I could stomach paying £12 for a single 28mm figure, it would have to be metal.

I like the set of 'Grim Hammers' Dwarves. Although they don't look quite as nice as when I saw the first photos of them, so I'm not sure now. Still, I'm a bit disappointed that as they are LotR infantry, it'll be a single sprue in the box. Which isn't very satisfying for £20. When LotR first came out, about 10 years ago admittedly, you got two sprues of 12 men, totalling 24, in a box for £12, now it's half that content for £20.

When this Hobbit fad passes I'll keep my eye open at wargames shows, LotR stuff has been pretty easy to pick up cheap at events I've been to.

£12 is alright for finecast, the detail on them now is amazingly good. I was an early adopter to finecast and they're more detailed/easier to work with than metal, so I don't get the big deal about having a heavier, more pain in the ass item to work with. I agree with you about the dwarves, they look a little crappy compared to how they looked when I first saw them. I think the dull colour scheme doesn't really help much

 jonolikespie wrote:
Huh, just noticed that in addition to having the rules in the box the warriors of Dale are 10 in a box. As far as I am aware LotR/Hobbit has always been frames of 12.

Also they are 10 dynamically posed warriors, where the warriors of Erebor are individually posed. It isn't much but they clearly ctrl+C/ctrl+V'd the finecast descriptions, why are they not doing the same with the plastics?

Wasn't the fighting urukhai 20 to a box so 10 per sprue? Maybe they are using thAt mold for these guys or at least layout of the mold.

 jlong05 wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Huh, just noticed that in addition to having the rules in the box the warriors of Dale are 10 in a box. As far as I am aware LotR/Hobbit has always been frames of 12.

Also they are 10 dynamically posed warriors, where the warriors of Erebor are individually posed. It isn't much but they clearly ctrl+C/ctrl+V'd the finecast descriptions, why are they not doing the same with the plastics?

Wasn't the fighting urukhai 20 to a box so 10 per sprue? Maybe they are using thAt mold for these guys or at least layout of the mold.

Yes, and the Easterling foot were as well IIRC.

 Dawnbringer wrote:

 jlong05 wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Huh, just noticed that in addition to having the rules in the box the warriors of Dale are 10 in a box. As far as I am aware LotR/Hobbit has always been frames of 12.

Also they are 10 dynamically posed warriors, where the warriors of Erebor are individually posed. It isn't much but they clearly ctrl+C/ctrl+V'd the finecast descriptions, why are they not doing the same with the plastics?

Wasn't the fighting urukhai 20 to a box so 10 per sprue? Maybe they are using thAt mold for these guys or at least layout of the mold.

Yes, and the Easterling foot were as well IIRC.

Pikes?

thats what took up the extra room in the Easterlings/Uruk Hai IIRC, so maby the warriors of dale have pikes...

Sounds about right but.. can GW show that? I don't remember seeing warriors of dale with pikes in the movie.

Where are the leaked pictures huh? You would think that the person who snapped the new Daemon pics could have got the LotR stuff as well!

indeed... last month the pics were posted well before the models were available to advance order

 supremeoverlordVECT wrote:
indeed... last month the pics were posted well before the models were available to advance order

True, but so far as I can tell, leaked Daemon pics only came out yesterday.

Several pics of the new releases (minus Lindir) taken from a blog (see photo):








Automatically Appended Next Post:
Now official pics from the preorder page:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCatsLarge.jsp?catId=cat970003a&rootCatGameStyle=athletic

There is some fairly nice things in there, shame I'd never get a game in otherwise I'd be sorely tempted to start up a dwarf army.

Is it the paintjob or the minis that are blobby...

Hammer dwarfs are cool, though.

Troops look great! I would probably say that they are actually worth the higher price compared to the older sets which were often very flat and had a plethora of missing details on their sides.

Characters on the other hand are all a bit naff. Thror looks like he has huge legs, to the point of being as tall as a human. The captain seems to be lacking a forehead and the elf is just boring.

However I don't actually consider anything in finecast to be part of the release any more so only focus in the plastics. Which in this case, were brilliant!

April will see the following new blisters:

Erebor Captain (Finecast, 13 €)
Thal Captain (Finecast, 13 €)
Thrain (Finecast, 15 €)

Also released two mail order Fincast blisters:

Gandalf and Bilbo (Gandalf drawing a sword, Bilbo jumping over a bush)
Gollum in Boat, holding a fish.

Now on preorder:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCatsLarge.jsp?catId=cat970003a&rootCatGameStyle=athletic

Captain of Erebor:


Captain of Dale


Thrain


Gollum with Fish


Gandalf and Bilbo Baggins:

"Oh my god, Gollum with a fish?! YES!" - Everybody

Where should I order my Gollum with a fish?

Is it just me or does gandalf look tiny?

I really like that Gandalf and Bilbo a decent amount, too. The rest... not as much.

Is it me or are the sculpts released by GW for the Hobbit recently have gone down in quality? I mean, look at Golem;



That, or it's just the paint job. When was Golem, erm, that colour?

Welp, that's it: my life is now complete. I have now seen the Gollum with a fish model, and my final check has been placed on my bucketlist. Come get me, North Korean bombs. My life's crowning moment has been met.

I quite like the captain of Dale, the warriors also. Hopefully they show up more in the next movies as they got about 5 seconds of action in the first one!

Gandalf is indeed very short looking even with his hunch taken into account. Then again all the scaling seems a bit off with a few of the Hobbit releases lately.

I like Gollum. Say what you will about the sculpt or the paint job, they succeeded in making him look incredibly happy about his fish.

Thror is perhaps my favorite dwarf GW has ever created. He really sells the kingliness angle.

 blood reaper wrote:
Is it me or are the sculpts released by GW for the Hobbit recently have gone down in quality? I mean, look at Golem;



That, or it's just the paint job. When was Golem, erm, that colour?

Yes, paint job is very sloppy. I could have painted that mini

Is his hand one solid piece? I guess trying to show webbing? No gaps between the fingers from what I can see

Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

silent25 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

How was the movie a bomb? It was the 4th highest grossing film of last year and was available to watch at the cinema for actual months! I wouldn't say it bombed at all!

Fourth against the Avengers, Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall

 stubacca wrote:

silent25 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

How was the movie a bomb? It was the 4th highest grossing film of last year and was available to watch at the cinema for actual months! I wouldn't say it bombed at all!

Fourth against the Avengers, Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall

Fourth isn't first. That it lost out to Skyfall which was a decent Bond movie shows how weak it was. People expected it to dominate like the LotR series did. Did good, but did not generate the buzz or excitement everyone who invested in tie-in products hope it would.

It did Ok in the cinema,

but it was not the Huge media hit that LoTR was,

it didn't get the 'vanilla' magazine, newspaper, TV, radio coverage that the original trilogy did,

and it's this extra coverage that drew folk who normally would not by tie in stuff to purchace a whole raft of junk/cool stuff including GWs LoTR stuff (unlike the Hobbit stuff)

silent25 wrote:

 stubacca wrote:

silent25 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Maybe GW realized their LotR stuff won't sell anyway and were like "Well, fack it, juts spit the stuff we got out, nobody cares anyway!".

And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

Yup. Sums up my thoughts on this. Movie was a bomb and so is the line. GW has officially thrown in the towel on this line. Committing minimal budget for sculpting and painting on them. Just enough to fulfill contract requirements.

How was the movie a bomb? It was the 4th highest grossing film of last year and was available to watch at the cinema for actual months! I wouldn't say it bombed at all!

Fourth against the Avengers, Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall

Fourth isn't first. That it lost out to Skyfall which was a decent Bond movie shows how weak it was. People expected it to dominate like the LotR series did. Did good, but did not generate the buzz or excitement everyone who invested in tie-in products hope it would.

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

Doesn't help the fact that almost nobody is aware, that a Hobbit tabletop game exists.
Not even White Dwarf thinks it is worth an article beside the standard one page per product in the news section, as if they are ashamed.

 Goliath wrote:

silent25 wrote:


Fourth isn't first. That it lost out to Skyfall which was a decent Bond movie shows how weak it was. People expected it to dominate like the LotR series did. Did good, but did not generate the buzz or excitement everyone who invested in tie-in products hope it would.

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

If that is the case, then that makes GW's failure to convert those ticket sales into unit sales of the game an even bigger issue. Although you could argue that there was something less of a 'buzz' about the Hobbit movie, just on the grounds that it wasn't anything new in the way that the first trilogy were, although again that would have to be a subjective statement on my part.

(OT - I thought I'd read that Skyfall was the biggest grossing film in the UK of all time? Or is this including international figures?)

Yeah, it's the highest grossing film of all time in the UK, but worldwide it's only seventh, presumably due to how "british" Bond is.

On topic, the fact that it did so well does seem to make it worse on GW's part, but to be fair they were screwed over a fair bit by New Line changing to three films and altering who would have been revealed by the "first" film.

So even though millions of people went out and saw the film, the models available in many cases aren't from the film they went and saw, as the models were made for a larger film.

 Goliath wrote:

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

Think you need to adjust for inflation. There are movies that made far more in relative ticket sales. And as I said, even if it was "successful", doesn't mean it wasn't a failure in the eyes of the studios. There are plenty of movies that were "#1" at the theater upon release, but are still considered a failure.

The Hobbit cost $250 million to make. That is a 20% return. I believe the studios expected far more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if you want to see what the highest grossing film ever was:
Gone With the Wind

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

silent25 wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

Skyfall is the seventh highest grossing film of all time, and The Hobbit is the 14th, only being beaten by The Return Of The King.
To say that it "didn't do as well as LOTR" is a demonstrable falsehood.

Think you need to adjust for inflation. There are movies that made far more in relative ticket sales. And as I said, even if it was "successful", doesn't mean it wasn't a failure in the eyes of the studios. There are plenty of movies that were "#1" at the theater upon release, but are still considered a failure.

The Hobbit cost $250 million to make. That is a 20% return. I believe the studios expected far more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if you want to see what the highest grossing film ever was:
Gone With the Wind

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

 Sigvatr wrote:
And yes, Gollum should see the doctor about his hand.

There's nothing wrong with his hand. It is, as the GW newsletter is quick to tell us, sculpted from their "premium resin". So it's obviously perfect, and any fault we find is our own!


Unless of course when they say "premium" they just mean the price...

 Goliath wrote:

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

Yes, because high profit projects are a clear indicator of how good they are. Games Workshop games are clearly the best, most balanced and enjoyable game. Games like Infinity and Malifaux are horrible because they make less money.

Still there are plenty of movies on that list I that I look at and think, people actually spent money and time on that garbage?

silent25 wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

Yes, because high profit projects are a clear indicator of how good they are. Games Workshop games are clearly the best, most balanced and enjoyable game. Games like Infinity and Malifaux are horrible because they make less money.

There are a lot of people who would say GW provide the best overall product.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

silent25 wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

That's odd, I was under the impression that this discussion of "success" was based on the number of people who saw the film affecting how many then went out (or didn't) and bought The Hobbit models.
I didn't realise that it was the profit made by the film that determined how many people bought the associated products.

my bad.



That post was entirely sarcastic. The amount of profit/"success" of by a film is irrelevant in regards to merchandise as it doesn't give you any idea whatsoever of the actual number of cinemagoers.

Yes, because high profit projects are a clear indicator of how good they are. Games Workshop games are clearly the best, most balanced and enjoyable game. Games like Infinity and Malifaux are horrible because they make less money.

There are a lot of people who would say GW provide the best overall product.

An annoyingly large number of those people haven't actually played other games or bought the models.

The real measure of how successful the Hobbit was, will be how many people go the second film.

 Kroothawk wrote:
Now on preorder:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/armySubUnitCatsLarge.jsp?catId=cat970003a&rootCatGameStyle=athletic

Captain of Erebor:


Captain of Dale


Thrain


Gollum with Fish


Gandalf and Bilbo Baggins:

The Captain of Erebor is great, the Captain of Dale is mech, everything else is passable. Why release yet another version of Galdalf and Bilbo when they have yet to release Radagast and his sled?

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Welp, that's it: my life is now complete. I have now seen the Gollum with a fish model, and my final check has been placed on my bucketlist. Come get me, North Korean bombs. My life's crowning moment has been met.

LOL

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
Thror is perhaps my favorite dwarf GW has ever created. He really sells the kingliness angle.

I was really down for buying the Thror model. I forgot to check the WD for prices, and I raced down to my local GW store to check him out. Then i saw the price tag - TWENTY BUCKS?! For a tiny half-size model?! He's a very cool figure, but I put him back with the ninja quickness.

I think the prices are really too much. My local GW store still has tons of the LE starter.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

Just watched shipping wars. Gullom looks like the red base ball player red statue, that one of the shippers had to move. LOL.

Just wish I could remember the names, sorry.

Wasn't there another Gollum with fish model?

Found it!

The link of highest grossing films adjusted for inflation is counting multiple theatrical releases for a lot of the old films (which is why so many are at the very top).

The Hobbit movie did a heck of a lot better than the game is doing, and as Kroothawk says, the fact that GW didn't / isn't marketing it anywhere certainly contributes to that. There's plenty of Hobbit paraphernalia in the bookstores around here, and I think it has pride of place because it sells. Those people don't know anything about GW's figures, though, because they're only advertised where gamers would see them. And most gamers saw what happened with LOTR and won't be biting again...

In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Sounds [unenthusiastic]fun[/unenthusiastic].

It would be nice if they could put out anything that is both a half decent model and at a reasonable price.

 Kroothawk wrote:
In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Christ, 40€...that's a bit...high....

 cincydooley wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Christ, 40€...that's a bit...high....

welcome to the world of GamesWorkshop, lad...

Just a question: how much are Warriors of Rohan right now on the GW website (for some reason it says Site Temporarily Unavailable whenever I try to access the GW website here in the Philippines)? I have bought a box of 24 in my FLGS for Php 1550, so that's around $37-38. If I remember correctly they have stopped selling boxes of 24, right? So what I got must be some old stock.

12 for 24.75 US-$.

they come in like boxes of 12 for about $30

enjoy

So that means I "saved" some cash by buying old stock? Nice.

In comparison, the Fellowship of the Ring plastics are Php 2250 (around $55). For 9 plastic figures. While it's $38 for 24 plastic figures. THAT'S INSANE.

 Kroothawk wrote:
In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Well I'm curious to see this model, at least

In 2 days, official pics are up. Until then:
It is a decent model true to the original.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
In May, Hobbit will get just one release: Radagast the Brown on Sled (40€). Hobbit is covered on three glorious pages in the May WD (2 pages product presentation, one page fake preview with Goblin King).

Christ, 40€...that's a bit...high....

Not half. I'd have been tempted by it just for painting/display, but I can get 54mm Kabuki pin-ups for less than that. Or a decent sized resin vehicle.

Outrageous price. I'd give you Eur15 for it, tops.

THEN I'd have to start the extensive remodelling needed to make the "rabbits" look like lagomorphs.

So far, apart from the Misty Mountain goblins, I'm pretty disappointed with the Hobbit range and the prices are mind boggling. I can only assume they are having to pay New Line some mind-blowing royalties.

Here the official pic:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat970003a&prodId=prod1990216a

Those rabbits...

The sled and rider seem decent. I don't know if it's the paint jobs, or if the sculpts are truly as lackluster as they seem for the Hobbit stuff (and some of the LOTR stuff). But there it is... those rabbits look extremely fake and stiff-legged...

Is it just me or does Radagast look like the Hobo version of Father Christmas?

Well, I'm guessing whoever painted those poor, poor bunnies should be taken out and shot, but I actually kind of like the model. That many thin extremities should not ever have even been considered for sale in finecast, though - I certainly will be staying away from this due to the material. Shame, it's actually quite a fun piece, in a strange way

 Ketara wrote:
Is it just me or does Radagast look like the Hobo version of Father Christmas?

Yes, but that's PJ's fault and not GW, though they are the one's trying to charge $50 for it. ($60 if you are Cdn)

Oh good. I was worried they hadn't found a way to give an oval base release to the Hobbit.

Thurlac wrote:
Outrageous price. I can only assume they are having to pay New Line some mind-blowing royalties.

I think at the last minute the licensing for the hobbit (across the board, not just for GW) tripled (and hopefully covered all three films or something).
Still doesn't really seem like a good idea for GW to be pricing their stuff this high, they need people to actually buy it.

 Bolognesus wrote:
Well, I'm guessing whoever painted those poor, poor bunnies should be taken out and shot, but I actually kind of like the model. That many thin extremities should not ever have even been considered for sale in finecast, though - I certainly will be staying away from this due to the material. Shame, it's actually quite a fun piece, in a strange way

exactly...
if this guy was plastic i would paint it...
it has a unique whimsy...
unfortunately, i can just see those poor Finecast bunnies droop and snap off quite easily...

cheers
jah

Yeah it's a disaster waiting to happen. If it was in plastic for £15 or finecast for £10 I'd consider it, because then I wouldn't feel so bad about replacing the bunnies and/or using wire instead of finecast for the harnesses so they'll stay where they are sculpted.

It's a shame because I actually like the model.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Oh good. I was worried they hadn't found a way to give an oval base release to the Hobbit.

The rabbit chase was the low point in the film for me. It wasn't in the original story, it was kind of pointless and special effects were awful.

Consequently I'm not particularly drawn to this model.

EDIT - And especially not at the price of £30!!!!

A WHFB GIANT is the same price as this sled.

A fecking ARACHNAROK is almost the FECKING same prize as this piece of trash.

Just think about it.

 Ketara wrote:
Is it just me or does Radagast look like the Hobo version of Father Christmas?

Actually.. I remember watching the film and thinking he looked like Sylvester McCoy as Doctor Who

If I can get my Warg Riders to that thing . . .

Actually, not just my warg riders. Any model that you can get a few of can and will kill that thing really quickly. Look at the base size!

Irregular Miniatures do 54mm rabbits for 50p each. scratchbuild anyone?

Such a shame that it looks like GW can't get their act together with the Hobbit figures. At least with LotR part 1 they had Lurtz as a bad guy and a half decent Balrog but right now they have very little in the way of opposition other than the Goblin King. However I would point out that merchandising across the board is pretty bad for this movie. Even most of the books and some of the premium books have no reference to Azog, who is a pretty big part of the movie. I get the distinct impression that Azog was added late or very poorly marketed by the film company. Also very few people other than the Perry twins got to see the movie sets so it's no surprise that the current models feel a bit duff. As for the Gollum models, they really have no excuse there as he's well known from LotR so they could have used that as reference material. I wouldn't read too much into the 'limited' edition still being available, even though it hasn't been very successful I think it's limited to being around just for this year and next year there will be another box just like with LotR. I'm sure plenty of people will see the second film just as with LotR which took time to be popular.

this Hobbit release bunch has been painful to look at
rather ugly models and prices that rival fantasy... for a game with lesser quality miniatures.
I am not paying for the brand here... I just wanted some dwarves, but alas no not at those prices I don't

Some meager Hobbit releases for July, to show that GW is still aware of this game:

Azog (mounted and on foot) 35€
Young Thorin (mail order only) 15€
Young Balin (mailorder only) 21€
Young Dwalin (mailorder only ) 21€

No idea why Thorin is cheaper, the miniatures are quite similar.

Mereging threads.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/536427.page

Holy crap, they're up to 35 euros for a single foot/mounted character now?

That is quite simply INSANE. He costs the same as the already overpriced Hunters on Wargs box, which gives you six models of similar quality in a more reliable material!

I keep looking at these models and thinking "Yeah, some of these are nice!" and then looking at the price and getting pre-emptive buyer's remorse!

In the other thread, reds8n posted these pics:
Azog:




Young Thorin:


Young Balin:


Young Dwalin:

I actually might get those. First miniatures I have had interest in other than the Elven Cavalry.