I've hated heroic scale for a long time. Despite the greater detail, the outlandish proportions make them soldiers look like cartoony children. Child-like proportions

Do you wish that GW released true scale, proportion-wise, versions of their minis?

Honestly I'm on the other end of the spectrum. I think a lot of people are a fan of how truescale marine conversions look, but in reality it would break the game. If marines were suddenly as large as current scale terminators then there would be even less space on the tabletop. Tanks would be even more out of scale.

I think the goofy cartoon aesthetic has been what drew me into 40k in the first place. Warhammer has never really taken itself seriously, and the heroic scale has always been their thing. Just my take on it anyways.

Nope. If they did, they better bump the stats and make them more akin to marines in the fluff.

One of the biggest failings of the continue power creep and absolute ridiculous weapons-bloat is that Space Marines, an average Space Marine is apparently pointless in a game now.

That alone says that your rules are broken and stupid. Why make a bigger cooler model if it'll still be wiped off the table by the bucketful because there's a non-stop weapons race which has mode most models walking targets? Seems pointless.

 Don Savik wrote:
...but in reality it would break the game. If marines were suddenly as large as current scale terminators then there would be even less space on the tabletop.

I don't think it's miniature scale that results in less space... or what breaks the game.

Heroic scale isn't entirely the problem, IMO. It's a lot of other aesthetic decisions piled on top of that, that's sending GW faster and faster towards the Masters of the Universe action figure look.
And you know GW fans are taking it seriously, with their wallets...

Make marines rules to match their fluff, huh? So a squad of 5 marines can take on 1500 points worth of orks by themselves? That sounds fun for everyone involved who is the space marine player. Yea, an average space marine is useless, but so is an average anything. Troops are filler units, what else is new.

And can you seriously tell me with a straight face we've gotten more cartoony and action figure-y than 40k's humble beginnings? Look at any 3rd edition model or earlier and rethink that. Deathwatch and Rubrics, 2 of the most current space marine models to date, are more in-scale than other marines, to the point where they look weird next to regular marines. If you don't think GW is trying to make their models look correctly scaled then you're just nostalgia blind.

Taking it seriously....WITH THEIR WALLETS *dramatic music* Like how insanely fast the triumvirates are selling? Or how much magnus sold? I don't think the fanbase is the hivemind you think it is. What current miniature release are you talking about here exactly?

 Don Savik wrote:
And can you seriously tell me with a straight face we've gotten more cartoony and action figure-y than 40k's humble beginnings?

I thought that was what you liked. But here:

Taking it seriously....WITH THEIR WALLETS *dramatic music* Like how insanely fast the triumvirates are selling? Or how much magnus sold? I don't think the fanbase is the hivemind you think it is. What current miniature release are you talking about here exactly?

You're focusing on trivial details as if this matter was a 40K rulebook. I'm talking about the wider picture. I'm talking about whatever turns up in the 40K and AoS announcement topics, up in news and rumours. No matter how ridiculous a new release looks, for every one who doesn't like it, there's five who'll pick up the chorus of "ohh me wallet! I didn't need to eat this month anyway. I already bought £200 of X but I guess I can spend another couple of hundred on these Y". I see people expressing disappointment that a certain release is delayed, but that's okay because they can use the budgeted money on some other GW product - doesn't seem to matter which GW product. I see people drooling over the special rules of a new model as much as the model itself, which makes it seem like they're as interested in buying a win as in buying a mini. I see constant assurances that the slight upward twitch in fantasy sales means AoS is selling like hot cakes. I see people making Alan Merrett's words gospel. I see people taking the purchase of GW minis fairly seriously, or at least going about it with a serious determination.

I've also noticed that people who say GW minis are obviously not to be taken seriously, take them a bit more seriously when you point out that they can't be.

 Elbows wrote:
Nope. If they did, they better bump the stats and make them more akin to marines in the fluff.

One of the biggest failings of the continue power creep and absolute ridiculous weapons-bloat is that Space Marines, an average Space Marine is apparently pointless in a game now.

That alone says that your rules are broken and stupid. Why make a bigger cooler model if it'll still be wiped off the table by the bucketful because there's a non-stop weapons race which has mode most models walking targets? Seems pointless.

well they've got to sell models lol. I also mean proportion-wise.

I mean, don't you guys find heroic scale proportions really kiddy and ugly?

Don't forget they also have to take into account the amount of punishment, physically, a tabletop miniature endures.
Think about it, they get picked up, dropped, knocked over and around, crushed into carry cases etc.

If you made everything realistic scaled then a 28mm soldier's gun barrel would be about a hair's breadth wide. Wrists would snap in a stiff breeze, sword blades would be made of cling film etc.
Part of the aesthetic is also a design choice made so that they can survived being moulded, painted and used in gaming.

PossumCraft wrote:
Don't forget they also have to take into account the amount of punishment, physically, a tabletop miniature endures.
Think about it, they get picked up, dropped, knocked over and around, crushed into carry cases etc.

If you made everything realistic scaled then a 28mm soldier's gun barrel would be about a hair's breadth wide. Wrists would snap in a stiff breeze, sword blades would be made of cling film etc.
Part of the aesthetic is also a design choice made so that they can survived being moulded, painted and used in gaming.

Army men have more realistic gun proportions and they do just fine. What are your thoughts on bodily proportions though?

The price difference between wh40k and army men is like night and day too


I wish GW made models cheaper but encouraged people to buy more models so we could build gargantuan armies. probably not their business model though

I like both. Realistic proportions and the cartoony.
For example with historical miniatures for example ww2 i would want them completely realistic.
But with fantasy figures i like to have big swords and stuff, more exaggerated proportions.
For sci-fi like 40k i want something in between similar to infinity for example.
But i must say generally the cartoony look works best on 28mm figures. Or else i feel its so hard to paint and see the fine details. For example the face.

But about your question, yes i would want them to release more proportioned figures. But in 54mm scale like the inquisitor figures

But in the end i like it all, superhero proportions, GW, Realistic, Warcraft Proportions etc.

 Don Savik wrote:

And can you seriously tell me with a straight face we've gotten more cartoony and action figure-y than 40k's humble beginnings? Look at any 3rd edition model or earlier and rethink that. Deathwatch and Rubrics, 2 of the most current space marine models to date, are more in-scale than other marines, to the point where they look weird next to regular marines. If you don't think GW is trying to make their models look correctly scaled then you're just nostalgia blind.

I didn't compare past and present


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DanceOfSlaanesh wrote:
I like both. Realistic proportions and the cartoony.
For example with historical miniatures for example ww2 i would want them completely realistic.
But with fantasy figures i like to have big swords and stuff, more exaggerated proportions.
For sci-fi like 40k i want something in between similar to infinity for example.
But i must say generally the cartoony look works best on 28mm figures. Or else i feel its so hard to paint and see the fine details. For example the face.

But about your question, yes i would want them to release more proportioned figures. But in 54mm scale like the inquisitor figures

But in the end i like it all, superhero proportions, GW, Realistic, Warcraft Proportions etc.

but the warriors of the Imperium are supposed to be tough men, don't you hate the big heads, stumpy bodies, child-like bodies?

I can see your point But honestly, i think having these proportions does good for GW, many of us started as kids after all.

By the way do you have any example of a sci-fi 28mm mini of proportions you like?

Heroic Scale doesn't bother me as much as scale creep. For example, why does GW insist on rebasing T3 1W models on 32mm bases?
32's look great for Marine, but 75% of the Deamon Infantry models should stay on 25mm. And don't get me started on Seekers, who are as large as a Space marine bike, yet only T3, 1W....ridiculous.

This is why I use the new Blue Horrors as my Pinks. I never liked the size of the plastic Pink Horrors. The new Blues are the same size as the old metal Pinks, so they are a perfect fit.
The plastic Bloodthirster and Lord of Change, while amazing looking models are a bit too big for their stats.

Why does every model that gets updated from metal/finecast into plastic have to have a seemingly mandatory 20% or more size increase?
This is a game of MINIatures, yet we keep getting BIGatures.

SM are fine to me. I would be more tempted to play guard if they were truescale, as I have no inclination to paint them as they are now.

Galef: I agree with you, i dont like the scale creep at all.
My guess is that it has to do with them switching to plastic.
From what i noticed plastic usually cant hold as much details as metal/resin at the smaller scale.
Even though their plastics have gotten better it still a long way to go in my opinion.

I've hated on the heroic proportions but i think a lot of the newer kits are better. Its something we all know will never happen... I enjoy GW miniatures for what they are. At least, there is a big difference in the proportions of Catachans vs. SKitarii. Also assuming this is a separate issue from true-scale marines. As for marines i like true scale, but just convert (there are plenty of good ways to convert them these days) them for special kill teams and stuff. I wouldn't bother for a normal game of 40k. as they say, they just die by the bucketloads so why bother. If you want to do something well painted just convert a one-off.

Also, I think the argument that heroic scale is sturdier design wise is starting to fall flat. GW is moving to a finer, more precious style... most of their new miniatures have fiddly bits that are just prone to being broken if used roughly (looking at you mechanicus).

Also, every game seems to have their own special proportions. GW is slightly fatter/squatter, Infinity is thinner/taller, and malifaux has exaggerated features and abnormally long legs.

 DanceOfSlaanesh wrote:
I can see your point But honestly, i think having these proportions does good for GW, many of us started as kids after all.

By the way do you have any example of a sci-fi 28mm mini of proportions you like?

To me the minis look like little boys wearing armour with grown man faces. Like dwarfs.

I'd prefer grown-man proportions. I want them to appear like how they appear in the artwork

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 DanceOfSlaanesh wrote:
I can see your point But honestly, i think having these proportions does good for GW, many of us started as kids after all.

By the way do you have any example of a sci-fi 28mm mini of proportions you like?

To me the minis look like little boys wearing armour with grown man faces. Like dwarfs.

I'd prefer grown-man proportions. I want them to appear like how they appear in the artwork

Show me a example of a sci-fi 28mm miniatures that you like

 DanceOfSlaanesh wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 DanceOfSlaanesh wrote:
I can see your point But honestly, i think having these proportions does good for GW, many of us started as kids after all.

By the way do you have any example of a sci-fi 28mm mini of proportions you like?

To me the minis look like little boys wearing armour with grown man faces. Like dwarfs.

I'd prefer grown-man proportions. I want them to appear like how they appear in the artwork

Show me a example of a sci-fi 28mm miniatures that you like

Unfortunately I don't have any good examples, but you know what I'm talking about right?

I look at heroic scale as just a practical means of making what amounts to chess pieces less breakable.
If you lean toward liking the look of dwarves rather than elves the look is not a bad thing to see.

Malifaux is a fine example of great models more in scale but you have to show them some care since they are a fair bit more in scale and things like ankles and wrists are terribly small.
It is a skirmish game (Same with Infinity) so a little more care can be given when you do not have some 50+ models to move.


I like both types of looks, 40k is more a thuggish brute force kind of game and Infinity and Malifaux I imagine as more a speed / dexterity type of game so the looks fit by my viewpoint.

 Talizvar wrote:
I look at heroic scale as just a practical means of making what amounts to chess pieces less breakable.
If you lean toward liking the look of dwarves rather than elves the look is not a bad thing to see.

but the characters are humans, not dwarves

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 DanceOfSlaanesh wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 DanceOfSlaanesh wrote:
I can see your point But honestly, i think having these proportions does good for GW, many of us started as kids after all.

By the way do you have any example of a sci-fi 28mm mini of proportions you like?

To me the minis look like little boys wearing armour with grown man faces. Like dwarfs.

I'd prefer grown-man proportions. I want them to appear like how they appear in the artwork

Show me a example of a sci-fi 28mm miniatures that you like

Unfortunately I don't have any good examples, but you know what I'm talking about right?

I know what you mean I guess i have grown up with them so i like all styles. But when you compare with Infinity miniatures it shows what you mean.

 Talizvar wrote:

Malifaux is a fine example of great models more in scale but you have to show them some care since they are a fair bit more in scale and things like ankles and wrists are terribly small.
It is a skirmish game (Same with Infinity) so a little more care can be given when you do not have some 50+ models to move.

Those Malifaux models are also horribly out of scale, but in the other direction. Good luck finding someone who looks like that outside of an anime series.

Anyway, "heroic scale" is a gradient. Older models do tend towards the fists-as-big-as-their-head chunky, but there are plenty of manufacturers out there nowadays who do heroic scale models that are much more reasonably proportioned. You can see with these Anvil and Victoria Miniatures models next to Cadians what I mean.

Frankly I find truescale 28mm models weird and spindly looking. As long as you're dropping down to 1/48 scale and depicting a fantasy universe, I'm fine with some mild proportion shifts to help with model focus and sturdiness.

Nope, heroic scale doesn't bother me. There is plenty of things about the hobby that could do with fixing before I worry about Heroic vs True Scale.

I definitely don't want true-scale anything. I thought you were initially talking about true-scaling Space Marines to the fluff - i.e. making them 1-2' taller than they are now.

Regarding proper physical proportions...no, no thank you. There is a reason that even more slight ranges are still cartoony-ish when compared to normal people --- it's for definition at game surface. More realistic proportions would make painting far more difficult, and the miniatures would be terribly spindly (Malifaux has some cool minis but they're very tall, and incredibly delicate to model/paint).

The models are, after all, game pieces. I've zero interest in realistically scaled fingers/wrists/ankles, etc. and I play Eldar.

Maximus Bitch wrote:

PossumCraft wrote:
Don't forget they also have to take into account the amount of punishment, physically, a tabletop miniature endures.
Think about it, they get picked up, dropped, knocked over and around, crushed into carry cases etc.

If you made everything realistic scaled then a 28mm soldier's gun barrel would be about a hair's breadth wide. Wrists would snap in a stiff breeze, sword blades would be made of cling film etc.
Part of the aesthetic is also a design choice made so that they can survived being moulded, painted and used in gaming.

Army men have more realistic gun proportions and they do just fine. What are your thoughts on bodily proportions though?

The price difference between wh40k and army men is like night and day too


I wish GW made models cheaper but encouraged people to buy more models so we could build gargantuan armies. probably not their business model though

By 'Army Men' do you mean the plastic green soldiers you buy for like 20 for £1?
Those are a much larger scale and have really poor detail.

Look at an actual 1:35 scale exactly accurate model soldier; the gun barrel on a rifle is about 0.5mm thick. Now imagine that in the smaller 1:48 which is close to 28mm scale.

Personally I do prefer slightly more realistic modelling than Games Workshop's humans. Hasslefree miniatures do fantastic models in 28mm - 32mm scale, much closer to realistic yet with enough charicature to them to make them stronger. Malifaux go to the extreme on realistic proportions are are both very flimsy in places and an absolute nightmare to attach to bases.

Those Prodos Warzone minis seem better proportionate than GW figures.

I tend to like more realistic looking figures. GW is getting better though. Greyfax is a giant but at least her proportions are less squatty. Artemis of DW is a giant too but looks better scaled than his other space marine brethren.

Imho

id love to see them redo their human line

IG being more done in scale with forgeworld.

i think GSC was a step in the right direction and looks pretty good next to new marines.

i dont mind marines going a little Death watchy ether slightly bigger.

 Desubot wrote:
Imho

id love to see them redo their human line

IG being more done in scale with forgeworld.

i think GSC was a step in the right direction and looks pretty good next to new marines.

i dont mind marines going a little Death watchy ether slightly bigger.

Deathwatch marines aren't actually "taller", it's just that their knees aren't bent.

 Formerly Wu wrote:

Those Malifaux models are also horribly out of scale, but in the other direction. Good luck finding someone who looks like that outside of an anime series.

...I actually know someone who looks like those anime figurines. She is hauntingly beautiful, but also kinda creepy at times when she's wearing tight clothes.

Doesn't help that she's obsessed with gore and likes Slaanesh.

Also I believe the old Inquisitor was relatively truescale? I think truescale works for that much better since you had a minimal amount of models to fiddle around with. 40k with it's scale is already having problems with any tanks larger than a land raider and monsters are getting to absurd sizes (remember how tiny the old BT was? I wish they'd go back to that scale, even if it's goofy).

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 Formerly Wu wrote:

Those Malifaux models are also horribly out of scale, but in the other direction. Good luck finding someone who looks like that outside of an anime series.

...I actually know someone who looks like those anime figurines. She is hauntingly beautiful, but also kinda creepy at times when she's wearing tight clothes.

Doesn't help that she's obsessed with gore and likes Slaanesh.

sounds like a cool girl


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:

Regarding proper physical proportions...no, no thank you. There is a reason that even more slight ranges are still cartoony-ish when compared to normal people --- it's for definition at game surface.

sorry I don't understand

I think GW and similar Heroic Scale manufacturers have found a decent balance between representation of game concepts on a miniature level, and ease of modelling/painting. Can you imagine trying to convert a thin, tall marine? The proportions they have now are extremely forgiving for the hobby side of things, and I personally like the way they look as well. To each his own.

 Luciferian wrote:
I think GW and similar Heroic Scale manufacturers have found a decent balance between representation of game concepts on a miniature level, and ease of modelling/painting. Can you imagine trying to convert a thin, tall marine? The proportions they have now are extremely forgiving for the hobby side of things, and I personally like the way they look as well. To each his own.

Perhaps. Personally I have a strong distaste towards models with child-like proportions. What's the point of easy painting if you don't like them very much anyway?

But apparently an army of kids dressed up in big boy clothes doesn't seem to bother the fans. To each his own.

Well, that's all subjective. I'm just saying that aside from matters of taste, there are some very practical reasons Marines in particular don't have realistic proportions. If they did a tac marine would be substantially larger than a current terminator.

True Scale yes, but in 15mm, so vehicles can be in scale with the models, and true scale throughout as opposed to heroic

i like heroic. The exaggerated proportions help fit the exaggerated fluff. It's not like 40k fluff can be taken seriously on any level. It's all ridiculous. The models should be too.

 Lance845 wrote:
i like heroic. The exaggerated proportions help fit the exaggerated fluff. It's not like 40k fluff can be taken seriously on any level. It's all ridiculous. The models should be too.

But do you like kiddy bodies?

No-one else sees them that way, Maximus.

 feltmonkey wrote:
No-one else sees them that way, Maximus.

I kind of do. I'm sure a lot of people do, just not the ones who've replied to this thread

Personally it depends on the race whether or not I care about proportions. Orcs, Lizardmen.... they're made up races and I like the absurd bulk they have.

Cadians, I both love and hate the aesthetic. If GW made Cadians with the exact same aesthetic but proper human proportions I'd be all over them.

When it comes to human models, LotR was my renaissance, after seeing and loving the LotR models made by the Perry brothers I found it really hard to ignore the horrible proportions on the humans seen in WHFB and 40k. It was made worse by the fact I collected Bretonnians at the time and it was around about the same time Bretonnians went from reasonably realistically scaled which I liked (funnily enough, also models done by the Perry brothers) to absurdly bobble headed which I found it really hard to like.

I like the aesthetic. I suspect many others do too - or ultimately it wouldn't sell...

True scale, all the way!!!

And the issue is very easily fixed. Since the standard human is represented by a guardsman, just make those smaller/more proportionate.

That fixes everything. Marines are bulkier in comparison, eldar are taller, orks are bigger, etc....

Just scale down the IG models a bit and everything is fine.

 feltmonkey wrote:
No-one else sees them that way, Maximus.

I don't think that my suggestion is absurd.

in fact, I don't think it's even subjective.

look at the proportions of a child, or a short person, then at the proportions of a reasonably tall grown man.

now look at a mini. the tough manly men we see in the artwork have been reduced to kids playing soldiers. or dwarfs, given the gnarly faces

Like Vintersong, I think scaling down regular humans to make everything look more impressive would work better. The 28mm (more like 32mm) is too large for the scope of game (about 1850 points) that players seem to like to play 40K at on a 6'x4' table. Heck, given some of the numbers of horde armies, it is borderline too big for rank-and-flank style games as well.

I mean it is what it, but if I had a miniatures scale specific time machine and could change the scale of GW games (and thus many other popular games), I think I would change it to 20mm as a good compromise to hobby and play-ability. But that might just be the WWII miniatures war gamer in me.

As for true scale, I wouldn't want actual true scale (too fragile doesn't work on the tabletop as well as you would think), but I wouldn't mind thing scale back a bit.

As a side note, I always found the term, 'heroic scale' funny for miniatures. It has the nearly the opposite meaning to heroic scale in comic book drawing which usually refers to a character being 7 to 10 heads tall. I think shrinking the heads some would help alleviate some of the issues there.

Infinity's models are the perfect example of true scale done right IMO

A semblance of scale is perhaps a better title...

"Heroic scale" is a marketing term for "we made these models chunky as our manufacturing techniques couldn't make anything better". Guns with thicker barrels hold up better to casting...

Games Workshop aren't the only perpetrator, "Heroic" scale was an industry standard. The problem, which a lot of the base don't see as an issue, is that the crap proportions is now a hallmark of the company.

"True Scale" in terms of Space Marines is also an incorrect term. The Marines, whilst being the wrong size, are already pretty huge. Rather GW started making them first, then the sculptors of the other ranges based their stuff from them (and again had to deal with the hubris of being stuck with chunky sculpts). An Imperial Guardsman is too big. They need to be scaled down first before Marines are increased in size, otherwise you wind up with Marines the size of Terminators.

A secondary issue, which effects the industry as a whole, is that people say they're one scale, but're actually another. This is mostly as far as I can tell down the aforementioned issue with manufacturing causing the infantry to be too large. What you wind up with though is vehicles which're gigantic, both in order to accommodate the wide infantry models, and because they're basing they're scaling off of incorrect measurements. The other end's stuff like Warlord Games, where the infantry are chunky, but the vehicles attempt to retain a semi-accurate scale; so wind up looking titchy in comparison (at least companies like CP models sell accurate 1/48th infantry if you want to use them alongside your 1/48th scale tanks - instead of the men looking like children).

I prefer models to be correctly proportioned. Obviously that's not an option, though something close is preferable. What you wind up finding however is every manufacturer doing their own thing with scaling, so the models looks disjointed (no, I don't mean the old "humans aren't all the same size" thing, that's fine, but guns aren't built in different sizes...).

I would say yes, if they scaled down the game back to like 2nd edition/early 3rd edition levels to compensate. But then people would pitch a fit that they can't use all their giant superheavy crap or would just refuse to play smaller point games so it wouldn't really fix anything.

I like GW's heroic scale, it fits the over the top nature of the game.

I prefer that each universe has his own aesthetic. Infinity its slim and manga, Malifaux its too exagerated but just the inverse of 40k. Where 40k its chunky, Malifaux its very slim.

Historicalls have realistic proportions and thats good, but actually, Kings of War miniatures normally have realistic proportions too, and they see a little wrong to fantasy, I don't know.

Space Marines are chunky because thats how they are

I prefer the look of my Infinity models over Space Marines, but:

I think that GW models are more practical as game pieces, especially for Warhammer.
GW models are easier to build, paint and convert (which is helpful to beginners), say what you will about oversized pauldrons, but they are a nice space to paint a symbol or designating colour.
GW models are also tougher, which (like painting and assembly) is less important the fewer models you use a game.
Finally, I can look at a 40k table from 4" away and recognise what is on the table and what the WYSIWIG load out is. With Infinity I can maybe see the type of weapon (launcher, rifle and maybe HMG or sniper rifle), and the size (i.e. silhouette), maybe if I am very familiar with those models I can make out a few. Usually I have to be at the table and playing to see the models decently. Which, again, is fine if you have less than 20 models on the table. In a game of Warhammer I want to be able to see what's what at a glance.
Also note that one of GW's aims is creating a spectacle, which the heroic (scale and sculpt) models are better at (Infinity tables though... ).

 DarkBlack wrote:
I prefer the look of my Infinity models over Space Marines, but:

I think that GW models are more practical as game pieces, especially for Warhammer.
GW models are easier to build, paint and convert (which is helpful to beginners), say what you will about oversized pauldrons, but they are a nice space to paint a symbol or designating colour.
GW models are also tougher, which (like painting and assembly) is less important the fewer models you use a game.
Finally, I can look at a 40k table from 4" away and recognise what is on the table and what the WYSIWIG load out is. With Infinity I can maybe see the type of weapon (launcher, rifle and maybe HMG or sniper rifle), and the size (i.e. silhouette), maybe if I am very familiar with those models I can make out a few. Usually I have to be at the table and playing to see the models decently. Which, again, is fine if you have less than 20 models on the table. In a game of Warhammer I want to be able to see what's what at a glance.
Also note that one of GW's aims is creating a spectacle, which the heroic (scale and sculpt) models are better at (Infinity tables though... ).

What do you mean by 'spectacle'?

because what I see is a crowd of little kids playing dress up with those proportions.


Space Marines are depicted as pinheads in artwork but as bobbleheads in the minis. I'm not a fan of either

Maximus Bitch wrote:

What do you mean by 'spectacle'?

because what I see is a crowd of little kids playing dress up with those proportions.


Space Marines are depicted as pinheads in artwork but as bobbleheads in the minis. I'm not a fan of either

GUYS! HEY GUYS!
DID YOU KNOW THAT Maximus Bitch THINKS GW'S PROPORTIONS MAKE THE MINI'S LOOK LIKE CHILDREN?!
HE MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN CLEAR OR SAID IT ENOUGH!
NOW YOU ALL KNOW!

Sorry you don't like them. A table full of mini's looks spectacular; even more so if you don't have to bend over to make out what is what. Extra points if the armies look heroic and/or badass.

I agree with others about IG being scaled down rather than SM being scaled up. In my anecdotal experience most IG players think that the current plastics look to big and bulky. I guess there are fluffy reasons for the Catachans to be a bunch of giant bodybuilders, but what's up with the Cadians? Reducing the size of IG would make Marines look bigger in comparison.

I also think they could introduce a line of Ork Yoofs. Make them Strength and Weapon Skill 3, and a little bigger than a Catachan but a little smaller than a current ork boy. Kind of like the Gorkamorka era orks. Give them crummier weapons but make them cost less than ork boyz. Then bump up the current ork boyz to Strength 4 and make them cost a few more points. That way orks get a new kit (everyone has a gazillion of the current boyz set), a good option for running horde armies and are gigantic boyz are no longer Strength 3. Space Marines get a side benefit of looking appropriately big compared to the Yoofs.

I really dislike GW's 'heroic proportions on a lot of things. Space marines look silly, and Cadians look awful because they're made to ridiculous comparison. And it isn't just a matter of size, it really is about proportion. The massive heads and hands and bulky forms really just make things look like they came out of a fisher price catalogue.

The problem, however, is that if GW were to go down the route of rescaling their range, they'd have to basically cover everything at this point. It's funny, because you see occasional releases that show GW themselves want to move away from that aesthetic, like the new Custodians and sisters, but the main bulk of things remain the same. I wouldn't be surprised if the artists and sculptors at GW feel similarly frustrated for this.

Personally, I cannot stand most of GW's human(like) offerings anymore. Some Eldar and Dark Eldar pieces are nice, but I just can't take super soldiers that can't properly bend their knees, move their legs or get up once they fall over seriously. Not to mention that the plastic Cadians were bad when they were released almost twenty years ago and only got worse since then. A crying shame, since the metals before them were very decent for their time and we could have gone that way, if not somebody looked at the Catachans and said to himself "Yes, that's what a viable human being looks like."

In any case I don't wish for GW to drop its Heroic styling, simply because there are people that enjoy it and want it that way. I'm not one of them, though, so I wished there were more manifacturers in 28mm Non-Historicals that produced high quality miniatures that are a bit more on the realistic side. Going completely realistic isn't the way either, in my opinion, since miniatures tend to look a bit boring and goofy in their own right if you try to scale everything "realistically". A bit of exagerration is both necessary and greatly enhances the end product, much like comics needed to find a spot between 90s Rob Liefeld Sixbloodbacks and hyperrealistic snorefests. There is a certain sweetspot where the miniature isn't properly true scaled, but also a far cry from the bobbleheads and gorillahands of Heroic Land and I'd wish we'd see more miniatures hit that place. Many LotRSB miniatures, most of Infinity and several Malifaux lines hit that spot and I think it looks perfect for the scale. I do have great hopes for 32mm though, since many sculptors seem to aim for exactly that there and women's faces are seemingly much easier to sculpt as recognizable females.

I tend to agree that normal humans should be sized down a bit, if only to make Space Marines actually look somewhat closer to how they actually are in the fluff. Seven foot tall supermen should stand a bit taller than your standard Cadian.

 DarkBlack wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

What do you mean by 'spectacle'?

because what I see is a crowd of little kids playing dress up with those proportions.


Space Marines are depicted as pinheads in artwork but as bobbleheads in the minis. I'm not a fan of either

GUYS! HEY GUYS!
DID YOU KNOW THAT Maximus Bitch THINKS GW'S PROPORTIONS MAKE THE MINI'S LOOK LIKE CHILDREN?!
HE MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN CLEAR OR SAID IT ENOUGH!
NOW YOU ALL KNOW!

Sorry you don't like them. A table full of mini's looks spectacular; even more so if you don't have to bend over to make out what is what. Extra points if the armies look heroic and/or badass.

Yes I had to make it clear because people just seem to bypass it.

I just feel that they'd look more grown up and handsome if they had adult proportions

Not 'true scale', because I'm a fan of the idea that some of the accounts of Space Marine stature are somewhat exaggerated.

I do, however, think they need to knock off the whole 'bowlegged Space Marine' thing. The way that Deathwatch Veterans and Rubrics were done is an improvement over the legs of before... where Space Marines look like they're all dropping a Legionary Log in their power armor.

And FFS, someone needs to slim up the Guardsmen a bit, get the team from Forge World to handle that, because at least Kriegers and Elysians have a proper human scale.

I agree that Malifaux has pushed back in the opposite direction for the most part. It is interesting to see them keeping up a highly stylized line without using the standard way to stylize them. Oh, and Dark Eldar Wyches have just about the same ankle troubles that you might find in some of Malifaux's more dynamic sculpts- just remember that Malifaux's style relies on a lot of extremely small bits.


On proper True Scale minis- I think Dark Sword makes some really beautiful ones that come close (they still have some artistic exaggerations, but fewer than I've seen in every other lines- especially the George R. R. Martin minis that it turns out are going to be in a war game soon).

One of the big things that True Scale would help with is the women. "Heroic" proportions exaggerate anatomy in a way that we typically read as male attributes (the wide shoulders and huge hands and feet). That's one of the reasons why just swapping out the heads on Cadians doesn't really work out very well. If they were to move away from Heroic scale, we could see a lot more of GW's women would both fit in better and look more convincingly feminine.



Wel;l proportioned Space Marines would look terrific. And I don't mean to make them all huge- just make their heads, shoulder breadth and hand sizes into something I might believe is human.

I really love some of the artwork where space marines aren't oversized midgets.

Like these pieces of art:








I feel the worst offenders in GW's line right now are the Cadians, and I really would prefer some more delicate anatomy.

 odinsgrandson wrote:
I agree that Malifaux has pushed back in the opposite direction for the most part. It is interesting to see them keeping up a highly stylized line without using the standard way to stylize them. Oh, and Dark Eldar Wyches have just about the same ankle troubles that you might find in some of Malifaux's more dynamic sculpts- just remember that Malifaux's style relies on a lot of extremely small bits.

I don't have nearly as much problem with Malifaux's proportions because they don't look as awkward and clumsy to me. They actually look stylised, whereas so many of GW's models just look awkwardly broad and bobble headed.

 Galef wrote:
Heroic Scale doesn't bother me as much as scale creep. For example, why does GW insist on rebasing T3 1W models on 32mm bases?
32's look great for Marine, but 75% of the Deamon Infantry models should stay on 25mm. And don't get me started on Seekers, who are as large as a Space marine bike, yet only T3, 1W....ridiculous.

This is why I use the new Blue Horrors as my Pinks. I never liked the size of the plastic Pink Horrors. The new Blues are the same size as the old metal Pinks, so they are a perfect fit.
The plastic Bloodthirster and Lord of Change, while amazing looking models are a bit too big for their stats.

Why does every model that gets updated from metal/finecast into plastic have to have a seemingly mandatory 20% or more size increase?
This is a game of MINIatures, yet we keep getting BIGatures.

That's not scale creep, that's GW remaking the models without the limitations of white metal.

The thirster and lord of change were always that size in forgeworld, they only looked tiny and dumb in 40k metal.

It's like the Eldar avatar, the metal version is an ugly dwarf.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 feltmonkey wrote:
No-one else sees them that way, Maximus.

I don't think that my suggestion is absurd.

in fact, I don't think it's even subjective.

look at the proportions of a child, or a short person, then at the proportions of a reasonably tall grown man.

now look at a mini. the tough manly men we see in the artwork have been reduced to kids playing soldiers. or dwarfs, given the gnarly faces

Most people don't see it that way
I've never once heard anyone mention kiddy or child like proportions when talking about those miniatures.
It's mostly in your head and you're obsessing about that detail so it seems huge to you.

But really, nobody cares.

I have never once seen the cadians as children, and they were what got me into Warhammer in 2008 (although I didn't start playing until 2012) when I bought the box of 20 guardsmen and thought to myself, 'Damn this is cool'. I don't want them changed, no thank you.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
I have never once seen the cadians as children

they must be dwarfs then, with those proportions

I don't see the resemblance.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
I have never once seen the cadians as children, and they were what got me into Warhammer in 2008 (although I didn't start playing until 2012) when I bought the box of 20 guardsmen and thought to myself, 'Damn this is cool'. I don't want them changed, no thank you.

I also love the Cadian aesthetic but unlike you I think it's really ruined by the terrible proportions of the models.

I have a bunch of Cadian models already, but I'd throw them in the trash and buy twice as many again if GW released Cadians with the same aesthetic but proportioned closer to actual humans, similar to the DKOK and Elysians from FW.

To be honest I think I prefer the practicality and visual impact of loose/heroic scale.

Not only is it much easier to visually scan WYSIYG with oversized weapons, but other oversized details allow you to really elaborate the details of the model, particularly the faces and battle markings, allowing you to add character to your (anti)heroes and armies.

As it is I struggle with detailing the open surfaces and practicality of transporting vehicle models. It would be a lot harder to transport all those tanks if the dimensions were doubled up!

I remember reading somewhere (a fan article) that the bolter on the model isn't meant to represent the bolter as it would properly scale. It's so big on the model because it represents the idea of a bolter, a (relatively) big gun that fires death and destruction. to the average imperial citizen (or to us today) the bolter would appear massive and deadly, so that's what gets shown on the model. and if they released new cadians I'd buy tons of them but I would keep my existing cadians.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
I remember reading somewhere (a fan article) that the bolter on the model isn't meant to represent the bolter as it would properly scale.

Sounds like a fan article to me

I think the real reason is probably closer to the designer thinking the kids will think it looks cool.

Maybe back in the day (80's and perhaps early 90's) the GW of the day would have made big guns as an intentional parody on absurdity, I think from the late 90's onwards GW got lost in their own parody.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
I don't see the resemblance.

Normal human proportions ---> 40K human minis ---> WHF Dwarf

Its on a continuum.

Or hobbits, not dwarfs, for that matter. Anyway they look like child-men, for lack of a better term, not grown up adult men.


I mean, you don't want your Army to look like Verne Troyer right?

Granted, they're not that bad, but still pretty bad when it comes to normal human proportions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nareik wrote:
To be honest I think I prefer the... visual impact of loose/heroic scale...oversized details allow you to really elaborate the details of the model, particularly the faces and battle markings, allowing you to add character...

But then when you look at the shape of the model as a whole, it loses its aesthetic.

I like heroic scale, It does not look like children or dwarfs to me.

If I wanted realism I would play historics.

 Rayvon wrote:
I like heroic scale, It does not look like children or dwarfs to me.

Look around at your fellow human beings though.

 Rayvon wrote:
If I wanted realism I would play historics.

I'm sure you wouldn't want the artwork (Guardsmen for example) to receive the same treatment.

Are you trying to have a genuine discussion, or debate? Or are you just complaining because you don't like the aesthetic? I guess I don't understand what it is you think you're going to accomplish here? GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

If you don't like the aesthetic, don't play, or find an alternate line of models. Easy. It doesn't do any good with you responding "but yeah, they look like children!" to every single post in this thread. That's not producing anything.

If you want more slender stuff, go play Infinity. GW isn't going to change their style (if anything it's become more outrageous with the AoS lines of minis) so it's a rather moot point.

Nah. True scale at 28mm is horrible.

 Elbows wrote:
If you don't like the aesthetic, don't play, or find an alternate line of models. Easy.

Well, can't I criticize GW?

It's not exactly easy to simply feth off. I like WH40K! Just not the proportions of the minis.

 Elbows wrote:
Are you trying to have a genuine discussion, or debate? Or are you just complaining because you don't like the aesthetic? I guess I don't understand what it is you think you're going to accomplish here? GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

I don't like the aesthetic, but I'm not insisting that everyone must dislike it. Yes, I am trying to have a genuine discussion.

Secondly, I haven't been doing a whole lot of complaining. Don't mistake my disagreements for complaints.

I'm not hoping for a sudden change either, that's unrealistic.

 Elbows wrote:
It doesn't do any good with you responding "but yeah, they look like children!" to every single post in this thread. That's not producing anything.

Because some people say, "I don't see it", and I'm just helping them to "see it". Don't mistake them for complaints. I'm just trying to bring across my point of view.

I don't want to be repetitive, but I'm responding to a different person each time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Byte wrote:
Nah. True scale at 28mm is horrible.

I saw some photos of some 3D printed realistically proportioned minis at 28mm once. Let me see if I can find them.

 Elbows wrote:
GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

They might. They already changed once, look at the old Bretonnian models, they were much more realistically scaled. The old Cadians were a bit bobble headed but not as bad as many of the current models as far as being broad as a barn and guns so large they could barely be carried.

Also FW's DKOK have been hugely popular and are more realistically scaled.

GW rescaled skeletons to be more realistically scaled as well, remember the old skeletons with skulls larger than the heads on living humans?

I'm trying to think of recent regular human GW releases, most of the kits that come to mind actually come from the 00's. The Kairic Acolytes are more recent and have a super-buff-dudes aesthetic, but they do have better proportions that most of GW's humans from the 00's.

Popularity wise I don't think the Space Marine line would benefit hugely from being properly proportioned, other than maybe fixing up the legs so they don't look like they're squatting. Although they haven't been "truescaled" the Deathwatch and Thousand Sons Marines are finally standing upright after 30 or so years of Space Marines only ever being in their wide legged stance.

BUT, my understanding has been GW's regular human lines have been more touch and go on popularity. Given we've had the same plastic Cadian models for some 15 years I would say it's a real possibility GW might change the proportions to something more realistic if they thought it'd sell better.

Also people have been wanting female Cadians and IMO they'd work much better if GW shifted to more realistic proportions.

EDIT: Actually I think GW already have slightly changed their regular human aesthetic, most of the more recent kits that come to mind aren't nearly as bad as the Cadians, Bretonnians and Empire models that came out in the early 00's.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

They might. They already changed once, look at the old Bretonnian models, they were much more realistically scaled. The old Cadians were a bit bobble headed but not as bad as many of the current models as far as being broad as a barn and guns so large they could barely be carried.

Also FW's DKOK have been hugely popular and are more realistically scaled.

GW rescaled skeletons to be more realistically scaled as well, remember the old skeletons with skulls larger than the heads on living humans?

I'm trying to think of recent regular human GW releases, most of the kits that come to mind actually come from the 00's. The Kairic Acolytes are more recent and have a super-buff-dudes aesthetic, but they do have better proportions that most of GW's humans from the 00's.

Popularity wise I don't think the Space Marine line would benefit hugely from being properly proportioned, other than maybe fixing up the legs so they don't look like they're squatting. Although they haven't been "truescaled" the Deathwatch and Thousand Sons Marines are finally standing upright after 30 or so years of Space Marines only ever being in their wide legged stance.

BUT, my understanding has been GW's regular human lines have been more touch and go on popularity. Given we've had the same plastic Cadian models for some 15 years I would say it's a real possibility GW might change the proportions to something more realistic if they thought it'd sell better.

Also people have been wanting female Cadians and IMO they'd work much better if GW shifted to more realistic proportions.

EDIT: Actually I think GW already have slightly changed their regular human aesthetic, most of the more recent kits that come to mind aren't nearly as bad as the Cadians, Bretonnians and Empire models that came out in the early 00's.

Are the old Bretonnians good or bad?

FW's DKOK is still pretty child-like IMO, from the pics I've seen.

Kairic Acolytes are much better. Why can't SM be like that?

Maximus Bitch wrote:
Are the old Bretonnians good or bad?

They're still hero scale, but they're not nearly as bad as the Bretonnians released in later editions.

IMO the worst period for GW's proportions of regular humans was when the plastic Bretonnians and Cadians were released, which I believe was the early 00's.

The Kairic Acolytes are really nice. Unfortunately I don't have a Tzeentch fetish, if they'd come with regular non-Tzeentch heads I'd probably buy 60 of the buggers just for the fun of it. They're crazy muscular, but still have proper human proportions which make them really stunning (compared to, say, the Catachans).

I can live with a bit of hero scaling, but Cadians are just crazy bad, the new Reikland Reavers are also hero scale, but they look a lot nicer than Cadians because their hero scaling is somewhat consistent, Cadians have this tiny little chest on to which comically large arms and heads attach, the Reikland Reavers are very broad as well, but the torso is somewhat in proportion. They're also scaled a bit larger, so that their heads (which are about the same size as Cadians) fit their body better. Of course Cadians I'd prefer they kept them the same size and just trimmed down the oversized bits, because Cadians are already pretty large compared to Space Marines.

I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

Thats cos they don't just want to sell 5 space marines haha


I never liked the look of the minis. But you know why I started this thread? Because one day, I was looking at my codex and a friend glanced at it. She asked me whether it was a game for young boys and whether I was getting it as a gift for a relative (young boy).


I asked her why and she mentioned that the minis had the proportions of children, Now I finally realised why I never liked the minis.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
Are you trying to have a genuine discussion, or debate? Or are you just complaining because you don't like the aesthetic? I guess I don't understand what it is you think you're going to accomplish here? GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

If you don't like the aesthetic, don't play, or find an alternate line of models. Easy. It doesn't do any good with you responding "but yeah, they look like children!" to every single post in this thread. That's not producing anything.

If you want more slender stuff, go play Infinity. GW isn't going to change their style (if anything it's become more outrageous with the AoS lines of minis) so it's a rather moot point.

Maybe they could release two versions lol

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

Thats cos they don't just want to sell 5 space marines haha


I never liked the look of the minis. But you know why I started this thread? Because one day, I was looking at my codex and a friend glanced at it. She asked me whether it was a game for young boys and whether I was getting it as a gift for a relative (young boy).


I asked her why and she mentioned that the minis had the proportions of children, Now I finally realised why I never liked the minis.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
Are you trying to have a genuine discussion, or debate? Or are you just complaining because you don't like the aesthetic? I guess I don't understand what it is you think you're going to accomplish here? GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

If you don't like the aesthetic, don't play, or find an alternate line of models. Easy. It doesn't do any good with you responding "but yeah, they look like children!" to every single post in this thread. That's not producing anything.

If you want more slender stuff, go play Infinity. GW isn't going to change their style (if anything it's become more outrageous with the AoS lines of minis) so it's a rather moot point.

Maybe they could release two versions lol

Or maybe you're 14 in your head and can't deal with the fact you're playing toy soldiers.

morgoth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

Thats cos they don't just want to sell 5 space marines haha


I never liked the look of the minis. But you know why I started this thread? Because one day, I was looking at my codex and a friend glanced at it. She asked me whether it was a game for young boys and whether I was getting it as a gift for a relative (young boy).


I asked her why and she mentioned that the minis had the proportions of children, Now I finally realised why I never liked the minis.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
Are you trying to have a genuine discussion, or debate? Or are you just complaining because you don't like the aesthetic? I guess I don't understand what it is you think you're going to accomplish here? GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

If you don't like the aesthetic, don't play, or find an alternate line of models. Easy. It doesn't do any good with you responding "but yeah, they look like children!" to every single post in this thread. That's not producing anything.

If you want more slender stuff, go play Infinity. GW isn't going to change their style (if anything it's become more outrageous with the AoS lines of minis) so it's a rather moot point.

Maybe they could release two versions lol

Or maybe you're 14 in your head and can't deal with the fact you're playing toy soldiers.

ooh much burn


Its just a critique on the look. I mean, I don't have the same issue with 40K artwork.

And, if the artwork started having the same proportions as the minis, how would you feel about it.

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

Its just a critique on the look. I mean, I don't have the same issue with 40K artwork.

And, if the artwork started having the same proportions as the minis, how would you feel about it.

You should look up the word critique.

What you're doing is ranting over and over about a point of view you have which almost noone shares (kiddie etc.) And which by your own admission is based on "maturity" concerns, i.e. those that only immature people worry about.

It's not welcome or productive or anywhere near as useful to others as a critique.

morgoth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

Its just a critique on the look. I mean, I don't have the same issue with 40K artwork.

And, if the artwork started having the same proportions as the minis, how would you feel about it.

You should look up the word critique.

What you're doing is ranting over and over about a point of view you have which almost noone shares (kiddie etc.) And which by your own admission is based on "maturity" concerns, i.e. those that only immature people worry about.

It's not welcome or productive or anywhere near as useful to others as a critique.

Relax, I didn't make this thread to talk about the maturity of players. You've misunderstood it. That post was just a question to Herzlos only.


You quoted Elbows, he said the same thing and I replied.

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Are you trying to have a genuine discussion, or debate? Or are you just complaining because you don't like the aesthetic? I guess I don't understand what it is you think you're going to accomplish here? GW isn't going to suddenly change the way they produce models.

I don't like the aesthetic, but I'm not insisting that everyone must dislike it. Yes, I am trying to have a genuine discussion.

Secondly, I haven't been doing a whole lot of complaining. Don't mistake my disagreements for complaints.

I'm not hoping for a sudden change either, that's unrealistic.

 Elbows wrote:
It doesn't do any good with you responding "but yeah, they look like children!" to every single post in this thread. That's not producing anything.

Because some people say, "I don't see it", and I'm just helping them to "see it". Don't mistake them for complaints. I'm just trying to bring across my point of view.

I don't want to be repetitive, but I'm responding to a different person each time.

Many people on this thread actually share my view.

Lastly, how would you feel if the artwork was given the same treatment?

"Maturity" and "wargaming" are words that have very little in common, considering it's a hobby where you push little dollies around and pretend they fight each other. And 40k of all things is pretty much the king of silliness and immaturity.

I'm one of those people who don't really care about heroic or true scale, what I care about is whether or not I like the look of the minis in question and how they fit in to my existing collection or the project I'm buying them for. I can certainly understand why people don't like heroic scale and there are a lot of really bad heroic scale minis. To give a couple of examples, the Catachan minis, which I quite liked back when they were released but you won't get any argument from me that they have aged terribly, or perhaps the infamous high elf spearmen with hands bigger than their heads. However looking at more recent GW offerings like the Ad Mech or Genestealer Cultists I think they're absolutely brilliant, still heroic scale though. If heroic scale really bothers you that much rather than ask a company who have a style that they've been using and evolving over decades to change just find some minis that you like and use them instead. There are loads of other companies offering brilliant true scale sculpts, many of which could be used for GWs games if you wanted. To take an example, with a bit of clever converting and scratch building you could make some great Imperial Guardsmen using the various Napoleonic ranges that are out there, or maybe some Tallarn style minis using some Napoleonic or WW1/2 arms, the bodies of the Gripping Beast Arab Spearmen set and a few sci fi bits and pieces (for Rough Riders Gripping Beast do two different Arab cavalry sets too). Obviously a lot of historic minis can also be used for fantasy projects with ease if you want to do some sort of human army, historical minis for the bulk of the army with a selection of suitably fantastical minis like wizards or monsters to add flavour.

One major complaint I have about GW's current range of minis it's the appearance of basically all Imperial vehicles. I know that the aesthetic that GW were going for is chunky and over the top but the proportions are all wrong to my eyes. Ideally I would like most of the Imperial tanks to be at least an inch or two longer, as it stands they're far too tall for their length. However I'm sure that there are plenty of people out there who love that look I'm just not one of them so I won't be buying any of their tanks. If I ever attempt to get back into 40k, which is unlikely given the current state of the rules, I would want to look for alternative options and convert them to work with the game or take a GW vehicle and convert it to have a look that I like.

Another issue that can exist is a lack of consistency within a range, I would argue that the Age of Sigmar range suffers this really badly at the moment. The sheer size difference between the Sigmarines or a lot of the new Khorne minis and the old Warhammer stuff is basically like putting early 80s 25mm scale minis alongside 28mm scale minis. It just looks wrong to me. That issue puts me off adding any of the AoS range to my collection simply because they won't fit in with anything else that I own, which is a real pity because GW have made some minis that I think are amongst the best fantasy minis currently available.

Ultimately I can't see GW dropping the exaggerated heroic scale aesthetic any time soon. Not only have they been developing and perfecting it for years but it also fits with the nature of the background of their games. If they were making "realistic" science fiction or fantasy games then yes I would expect to see less over the top designs that are closer to being true scale, but they're not. They make crazy cartoony minis for insane fictional universes. There's lots of room for improvement but recently releases definitely point in the right direction in my opinion.

There is one final issue here and that's the attitude of having to use the mini range that accompanies a ruleset to play the game. If you're stuck playing GW games in GW stores or tournaments that force players to use only certain minis (and not just GW are guilty of that!) then yes I can understand it (I used to do just that in my GW playing days) but if you're playing at home, a club or an independent store there's absolutely no reason to keep doing it. Provided the minis clearly represent the appropriate unit choices from your chosen ruleset then that's cool. It used to be the case that gamers would regularly throw a selection of minis from all sort of different sources on to a table and play a game with them. A lot of companies like to guide their customers into the mindset of only using their minis with their rules to maximise profits which from a business point of view makes complete sense and if I were in charge of a company producing both rules and models I would do exactly that. I'm not though, I'm a gamer if I want to use minis from 10 different companies I'll do it and I would suggest that other gamers do the same thing, they may find they get more enjoyment from the hobby.

 Nick Ellingworth wrote:
... it also fits with the nature of the background of their games. If they were making "realistic" science fiction or fantasy games then yes I would expect to see less over the top designs that are closer to being true scale, but they're not. They make crazy cartoony minis for insane fictional universes.

I've asked this question a couple of times with no replies. What if they gave the artwork the same treatment?

I'm going to 3D print some minis using the best source available, the Relic 3PS Space Marine. I'll post some pics soon.

Maximus Bitch wrote:
I've asked this question a couple of times with no replies. What if they gave the artwork the same treatment?

Erm you have seen some of the older art right? I'm thinking about Rogue Trader/2nd Edition era art. Some of that is even worse from a proportion point of view than even the most heroic style minis they produce today. Doesn't stop it being awesome though.

Take the 2nd Ed starter box as an example



Those proportions are all over the place. Still an awesome piece of art though, really gives a feel from what 40k was back in the early to mid 90s.

 Nick Ellingworth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:
I've asked this question a couple of times with no replies. What if they gave the artwork the same treatment?

Erm you have seen some of the older art right? I'm thinking about Rogue Trader/2nd Edition era art. Some of that is even worse from a proportion point of view than even the most heroic style minis they produce today. Doesn't stop it being awesome though.

Take the 2nd Ed starter box as an example



Those proportions are all over the place. Still an awesome piece of art though, really gives a feel from what 40k was back in the early to mid 90s.

Yeah I have. In the grim darkness of the far future everything is rainbows. Reminds me of that film Small Soldiers

Would you like the art to become like that again?

Note that Small Soldiers actually appear to have better proportions than the minis

Yes

I miss the sense of humour that GW's games had back in that era. A lot of their background material both art and written word has got too serious for it's own good despite the obviously silly nature of the universe.

And rainbows you say? I for one would massively welcome the return of the Rainbow Warriors

 Nick Ellingworth wrote:
Yes

I miss the sense of humour that GW's games had back in that era. A lot of their background material both art and written word has got too serious for it's own good despite the obviously silly nature of the universe.

I actually like true grimdark. Not over the top silly grimdark, but something that's truly and seriously grim and dark. Like when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. That Eastern Front Grimdark reflected in 40K is good.

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 Nick Ellingworth wrote:
Yes

I miss the sense of humour that GW's games had back in that era. A lot of their background material both art and written word has got too serious for it's own good despite the obviously silly nature of the universe.

I actually like true grimdark. Not over the top silly grimdark, but something that's truly and seriously grim and dark. Like when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. That Eastern Front Grimdark reflected in 40K is good.

You mean DKOK vs the soviet imperial guard?

morgoth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 Nick Ellingworth wrote:
Yes

I miss the sense of humour that GW's games had back in that era. A lot of their background material both art and written word has got too serious for it's own good despite the obviously silly nature of the universe.

I actually like true grimdark. Not over the top silly grimdark, but something that's truly and seriously grim and dark. Like when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. That Eastern Front Grimdark reflected in 40K is good.

You mean DKOK vs the soviet imperial guard?

No, I'm just referring to how grimdark the Eastern Front was. Not referring to any 40K faction.

Maximus Bitch wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 Nick Ellingworth wrote:
Yes

I miss the sense of humour that GW's games had back in that era. A lot of their background material both art and written word has got too serious for it's own good despite the obviously silly nature of the universe.

I actually like true grimdark. Not over the top silly grimdark, but something that's truly and seriously grim and dark. Like when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. That Eastern Front Grimdark reflected in 40K is good.

You mean DKOK vs the soviet imperial guard?

No, I'm just referring to how grimdark the Eastern Front was. Not referring to any 40K faction.

The western front was a lot more grimdark than the eastern one....

I like heroic scale - much easier to paint. And yeah, they are toys, not statues.

morgoth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

morgoth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 Nick Ellingworth wrote:
Yes

I miss the sense of humour that GW's games had back in that era. A lot of their background material both art and written word has got too serious for it's own good despite the obviously silly nature of the universe.

I actually like true grimdark. Not over the top silly grimdark, but something that's truly and seriously grim and dark. Like when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. That Eastern Front Grimdark reflected in 40K is good.

You mean DKOK vs the soviet imperial guard?

No, I'm just referring to how grimdark the Eastern Front was. Not referring to any 40K faction.

The western front was a lot more grimdark than the eastern one....

This isn't a WW2 forum, but why do you say that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kestral wrote:
I like heroic scale - much easier to paint. And yeah, they are toys, not statues.

So do you share Nick Ellingworth's opinions on the artwork?

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:
I like heroic scale, It does not look like children or dwarfs to me.

Look around at your fellow human beings though.

 Rayvon wrote:
If I wanted realism I would play historics.

I'm sure you wouldn't want the artwork (Guardsmen for example) to receive the same treatment.

I dont think I really need to look around at people to test out your theory, I have seen plenty of people and children in my fourty years of life.

Certain heroic scale stuff like the catachans and cadians do look a bit bobble headed, but it never really bothered me, they are models for gaming and painting purposes to me, more fantasy than a realistic representation of actual people.

The Malifaux and prodos stuff is a better scale but I do not like that as much at all.

Art is subjective, there is nothing more or less mature about differing views, plenty of the artwork has all the wrong proportions too !!

 Rayvon wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:
I like heroic scale, It does not look like children or dwarfs to me.

Look around at your fellow human beings though.

 Rayvon wrote:
If I wanted realism I would play historics.

I'm sure you wouldn't want the artwork (Guardsmen for example) to receive the same treatment.

Certain heroic scale stuff like the catachans and cadians do look a bit bobble headed, but it never really bothered me, they are models for gaming and painting purposes to me, more fantasy than a realistic representation of actual people.

Art is subjective, there is nothing more or less mature about differing views, plenty of the artwork has all the wrong proportions too !!

I never intended to discuss maturity. that's morgoth.

Yes, art is subjective, the bad proportions are mainly from SM, those pinheaded, elephant-legged, short-torsoed, high-shouldered freaks. But quite different from the minis.

And the question is how you'd feel if 40K artwork were drawn with the same proportions as the minis.

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

I never intended to discuss maturity. that's morgoth.

Yeah right.

Are you trolling or just being obnoxious on purpose?

morgoth wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

I never intended to discuss maturity. that's morgoth.

Yeah right.

Are you trolling or just being obnoxious on purpose?

I meant that your comments might have unintentionally misled others.

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

You see, it is statements like this that make people think that a, you're trolling; and b, you don't understand the concept of "critique".

That line is an implicit insult to Herzlos, insinuating that because he like the look of Heroic scale figures at 15 that he was less mature than expected for his age - going by your scale of expectations.

I'm not sure if this is because English might not be your first language - I see a Singapore flag for your location. I can see why this posting style may mean people don't wish to discuss this issue with you - but in spite of you, instead.

 Dysartes wrote:

Maximus Bitch wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I don't mind the cartoony look and chunky scale - it's probably why it appealed so much when I was 15.

The things I could never get my head around, though, were how I've got guardsmen in boots/trousers that are as tall as a superhuman soldier in an exosuit. And how in the books you can conquer a planet with just 5 Astartes, but in game 5 Astartes are pretty useless.

Neither spoil the game or fluff for me, I know they kind of painted themselves into a hole in it. I just find it a bit odd.

Interesting. I thought 15 was the age at which kids started turning away from the kiddie stuff and gravitated towards mature stuff. Some already at 14.

You see, it is statements like this that make people think that a, you're trolling; and b, you don't understand the concept of "critique".

That line is an implicit insult to Herzlos, insinuating that because he like the look of Heroic scale figures at 15 that he was less mature than expected for his age - going by your scale of expectations.

the critique part is a different issue.

I'm not saying that people who like the minis are immature.If Herzlos had said he was 12 when he started 40K then it wouldn't have remarked that. Was not meant to be an insult.

And if Herzlos was 12 when he started, I wouldn't say, oh, Herzlos is 30 and he's still playing with boy dolls, immature! Also, its ok, I've replied to morgoth.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 Formerly Wu wrote:

Those Malifaux models are also horribly out of scale, but in the other direction. Good luck finding someone who looks like that outside of an anime series.

...I actually know someone who looks like those anime figurines. She is hauntingly beautiful, but also kinda creepy at times when she's wearing tight clothes.

Doesn't help that she's obsessed with gore and likes Slaanesh.

Also I believe the old Inquisitor was relatively truescale? I think truescale works for that much better since you had a minimal amount of models to fiddle around with. 40k with it's scale is already having problems with any tanks larger than a land raider and monsters are getting to absurd sizes (remember how tiny the old BT was? I wish they'd go back to that scale, even if it's goofy).

That's funny, I knew a girl who looked like an anime character when she was a teenager, only thing I knew about her likes and dislikes is she HATED the anime/manga club.