Also, since they got that new CEO, I've seen some minor improvements to their business model.
The old CEO is still the chairman, and the new CEO was already a board member, if I'm remembering correctly.
In other words, the top leadership only moved some titles around. The same people are making the same decisions at the top for the same reasons as before.
Yes, the new CEO, Kevin Rountree, is the old CFO, someone handpicked by the Chairman for the position. Guess whose agenda he's going to follow? Meet the new boss, the same as the old boss. In and of itself this isn't a big deal, lots of companies do this kind of thing when their stockholders are apathetic about such matters; just don't expect anything different just because there's a different name next to the CEO name plate.
The thing is you can have an adults game that kids can play (like Monopoly or Risk) and both can enjoy, or you can have a kids game that adults can play (like snap) and adults get quickly bored of. Part of Warhammers appeal when I was a kid was that it was a game for adults. Now I'm an adult, it still has that appeal. I don't see it working the other way round for AoS. Especially if I can get my simple game fix for less from pretty much any supermarket or large chain store these days.
A game being played by kids doesn't make it a kids game. A game aimed at kids is.
I don't think it was ever a game for adults. It has always been firmly aimed at the 12+/tween crowd.
I would think a large portion of those who dislike AoS because it's new and NOT WHFB grew up with Fantasy - were there when it started, all big flashy boxed starter sets, army books, the works! And so they see it as theirs, and as a grown up past time far beyond the reach of mere children.
Look at all the crap that Jar Jar Binks got from the old Star Wars fans, but these same people can't enough of Wookies and Ewoks. "They've ruined Star Wars! It isn't the same! It's nonsense for kids!" Er yes, just like Star Wars was!
Personally, I'm exactly the same with anything I liked from the 80s getting a reboot
Y'know, I've seen a lot of complaining about Ewoks. Mostly Return is just a better movie than Phantom, so Ewoks don't get scapegoated.
Herzlos wrote:... or you can have a kids game that adults can play (like snap) and adults get quickly bored of.
Or snakes 'n' ladders, or ludo...
Part of Warhammers appeal when I was a kid was that it was a game for adults. Now I'm an adult, it still has that appeal. I don't see it working the other way round for AoS. Especially if I can get my simple game fix for less from pretty much any supermarket or large chain store these days.
I see what you're saying, though in my eyes the Warhammers have long been games for kids, dressed up as games for adults to appeal to kids. Younger brains can better handle and soak up the listbuilding and reams of rules, than on-the-spot tactical decision making. Add onto that the muscley, growly, homocidal he-men stuck in a grimdark, murderdeathkill, crapsack world covered in spikez and skullz, that must seem so badass and 'grown up' to a kid hitting early teens - which is often cited as GW's target market, rightly or wrongly... No wonder space marines sell so much. It's about on a level with Inhumanoids, Garbage Pail Kids, and 90's comic books.
People like to defend playing with toy soldiers by using a popular quote from CS Lewis: "when I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." And rightly so, I agree; but in my view those 'childish things' are what GW uses to hook it's childish audience: children! And a few others besides... I think it's backed up further by the full quote.
“Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.”
Emphasis mine. Granted, that could also be used in defence of playing with 'grimdark' minis and shallow, strategy-loaded rules that seem childish in later life; but IMOGW's emphasis on all that is increasingly focused on the awkward, adolescent, 'pseudo-adult' window at the end of childhood, before adulthood proper, rather than the level of CS Lewis' 'fairy stories' or on a wider market on both sides of that age range. I feel that an uncomplicated but deeper, easy-to-learn-hard-to-master set could be enjoyed by kids and adults on different levels, and toned-down mini ranges could be both more family-friendly and appeal more to adults fed up with what they see as the 'silly oversized toys' coming out of GW these days.
That so many adults do still cling to it is a puzzler to me, sometimes, but I'm going to guess nostalgia and inertia play a part. (Heck, seeing some oldhammerers gush over dreadful new Kev Adams sculpts as 'the best ever', and having a fan of KoW - a five-year-old game - effectively respond to "why not go full hog with elements now WFB's dead" with "but that's just the way it's always been", convinces me that nostalgia and inertia have a lot to do with the state of fantasy wargaming overall)
With AoS, and it's big ol' macho-man ground marines and minimal basic rules (if there were any fewer they wouldn't exist) backed up by more and more special rules in warscrolls (notwithstanding a couple of tactical considerations. You can choose who goes first. Yaaaaayyyy...), it just seems like GW have dialled that attempt to appeal to confused, hormonal 13-year-olds up to eleven. Even greater tunnel vision. Maybe it'll end well, but I can't see it.
A game being played by kids doesn't make it a kids game. A game aimed at kids is.
Yup!
IAmX wrote:40K will keep them going with its ever-growing popularity lately
I think that depends on whether their dropping revenues are entirely down to poor sales of WFB and The Hobbit.
monders wrote: I don't think it was ever a game for adults. It has always been firmly aimed at the 12+/tween crowd.
I would think a large portion of those who dislike AoS because it's new and NOT WHFB grew up with Fantasy - were there when it started, all big flashy boxed starter sets, army books, the works! And so they see it as theirs, and as a grown up past time far beyond the reach of mere children.
Look at all the crap that Jar Jar Binks got from the old Star Wars fans, but these same people can't enough of Wookies and Ewoks. "They've ruined Star Wars! It isn't the same! It's nonsense for kids!" Er yes, just like Star Wars was!
Personally, I'm exactly the same with anything I liked from the 80s getting a reboot
Editions 1-3 were definitely aimed at adults (with 3rd as my favorite edition of the game).
4th edition, with the big box, was a reboot in many, many ways - and aimed at a younger crowd. Major changes to the magic system, and the armies split between more books.
Still a good game, as was 5th. 6th was okay....
Then with 7th they started marketing the boxed starter sets as scenarios, rather than as an entry into the complete game.
And the sales of the starters, in my local area, at least, dropped.
Sales were still better than for the competition - but for the first time there were folks in the group that decided to just wait for the hardcover, rather than get the box.
With the last edition of Warhammer... we decided to just switch to Kings of War instead.
The new rules did not attract us in the same way that the earlier editions had. Only one of us bothered to get the rules - and he brought the game for us to look at.
He was not happy when he brought it in - and he had been our biggest GW fan. (Thus willing to spend way too much on the over priced hardcover book.)
None of my core group has bought Age of Sacroiliac.
Some of us are in denial - that GW will come out with a new edition of Warhammer, and everything will be fine.
With puppies and rainbows.
But most of us look at the last edition of Warhammer, and we look at Age of Sigmar, and we believe that Warhammer is done.
Herzlos wrote:... or you can have a kids game that adults can play (like snap) and adults get quickly bored of.
Or snakes 'n' ladders, or ludo...
Part of Warhammers appeal when I was a kid was that it was a game for adults. Now I'm an adult, it still has that appeal. I don't see it working the other way round for AoS. Especially if I can get my simple game fix for less from pretty much any supermarket or large chain store these days.
I see what you're saying, though in my eyes the Warhammers have long been games for kids, dressed up as games for adults to appeal to kids. Younger brains can better handle and soak up the listbuilding and reams of rules, than on-the-spot tactical decision making. Add onto that the muscley, growly, homocidal he-men stuck in a grimdark, murderdeathkill, crapsack world covered in spikez and skullz, that must seem so badass and 'grown up' to a kid hitting early teens - which is often cited as GW's target market, rightly or wrongly... No wonder space marines sell so much. It's about on a level with Inhumanoids, Garbage Pail Kids, and 90's comic books.
Since I was a kid at the time I'm not sure how adult it really was, but I always got the impression it at least *pretended* to be adult in order to appeal to kids. Sure the list-building and fact learning is something kids prefer, but at the time the naming hadn't descended into Murderfang with his Murderlust and Murderclaws from planet Murderwhatever. There were plenty of silly names (Sly Marbo) but they tended to be more subtle (it took years before I realised he was literally Rambo), and had an air of not being aimed directly at 12 year olds.
True, true. It's always been a wee bit grimdark (and heck, things like Game of Thrones don't find their huge audiences among kids... I assume) and satirical, but the former and certain other themes seem to have been ramped up with each year or new edition, as Auldgrump says. Gone over the top, jumped the shark...flanderised. That's the word. That'll do nicely.
Auld Grump - Ah I didn't really think of Warhammer before that starter set. So some proper Long Beards have been through this before? Ouch! Thanks for the history lesson.
Vermis - thanks for bringing Flanderisation to my attention. It's good to know I can sit and watch, say, TBBT, and actually have a term to describe just why it is getting progressively worse!
the torsos are Greco-Roman inspired, and the faces are like Roman cavalry officers and Greco-Roman death masks... the feet are pure medieval sabaton style vs. the power armor rounded boot... the grieves are way more medieval than the sloping Marine style... the knees are rimmed like Archaon's armor vs. the rounded Marine knee... and so on...
I'm not saying they don't have aspects copied from elsewhere that might have originally been Fantasy settings, I'm saying as a whole they look more sci-fi than fantasy (to me at least).
I think largely because of the unrealistic and inhuman bulk. Either the person inside has very weird proportions to the point where it reminds me more of genetic modification (it's not just a big person, it's a freakishly wide person) OR the armour is bulky because it's made from composites rather than from metal.
You can take aspects of historical and fantasy stuff (like you mention) and then feth up the proportions to make it look so unrealistic that it tends to fit better with a futuristic aesthetic.
I'd say some of Forge World's efforts in Space Marines have more of a Fantastical aesthetic than these guys (that is, you could slice off the chain swords, tubes, etc, and they'd fit perfectly well in to a Fantasy setting, IMO more so than the Sigmarines).
Vermis wrote: True, true. It's always been a wee bit grimdark (and heck, things like Game of Thrones don't find their huge audiences among kids... I assume) and satirical, but the former and certain other themes seem to have been ramped up with each year or new edition, as Auldgrump says. Gone over the top, jumped the shark...flanderised. That's the word. That'll do nicely.
That's a perfect way to describe what's happened with GW in recent memory. Given how much time I've spent on TVTropes, I'm surprised that it didn't occur to me sooner! The designers have ironed out all of the nuance in the setting in favor of BIGGER! FASTER! AWESOME! Age of Shareholders is just that process taken to its logical conclusion. They're really doing a disservice to the decades of background that we're all so attached to.
Speaking of background, that makes me wonder. So many claim that GW have built such strong, valuable IP that another company will swoop in and buy up the games when the company goes belly-up. AoS has shown us that they're willing to throw all of that away for an easy buck. My question is, what state will any of the background be in by the time GW files for bankruptcy? Will there be anything left to save?
What I find most interesting is GW's business approach appears be be overly fixated on cutting its losses rather than identifying and correcting what may be underlying deficiencies. This can be seen in their relentless restructuring and cost cutting within their organization, as well as the marginalization and subsequent retirement of their under performing lines.
If GW were a large ocean going cruise ship - this would be akin to ignoring small leaks and then sealing off sections below decks when the leaks turn into bigger leaks. While this kind of action will save the ship, it has the two side effects of displacing the passengers that were in the flooded section (set adrift by GW), and decreasing the amount of the ship that is above water.
Over the years, GW has closed off a number of flooded sections below decks - GW Events, NA Games Days, Specialist Games, (RIP Battlefleet Gothic). The passengers that were displaced from these areas initially just milled about on the deck, certain that GW would make things right with them, but eventually, many of them arranged for alternate passage as it became apparent that GW was not interested in their patronage. To fix the shortfall of revenue, GW increased fare prices. This caused some consternation amongst the unwashed masses in steerage and forced many of these people off the ship as well, but caused nary a stir amongst the well heeled in first class.
Most recently the staff of the SSGW noticed that the leak in the WHFB suites had become major and that portion of the boat was barely staying afloat. There were still many paying customers who were stubbornly still staying in their increasingly waterlogged suites, some of which were in first class. Acting according to their doctrine, the SSGW sealed off this area and built a shiny new Age of Sigmar suites and invited their customers to use this area. Many of the guests from the WHFB suites were dismayed that this new area, while shiny, lacked many of the amenities which made the stay in the WHFB suites so enjoyable (rank and flank, points costs) Instead, the new areas provided all the McDonalds you can eat and the room assignments were given out on a "first come first served" basis, with no occupancy limits..! At first they voiced their disbelief - surely the SSGW would carve out a small portion of the new suites for their old clientele. Alas, the only response was that they were invited to keep using the sealed and flooded WHFB compartments. Knowing that their time on the SSGW had ended, many of the former guests from the WHFB suites, they too sadly disembarked, hoping against hope that the SSGW might one day make a place that they could return to.
The proud SSGW is still steaming ahead full speed, safely above water. It remains to be seen if the Age of Sigmar will fully replace, and then eclipse revenue from WHFB... If it doesn't the SSGW might be in danger of capsizing, should she list due to uneven support from AoS and 40k (or even worse, she's taken on too much water to stay afloat in its current incarnation)... in this case, the course of action may be to rechristen the SSGW, the SS40k and cut loose all the damaged areas, restructuring the cruise ship into an exclusive luxury yacht. The first class customers in the 40k suites would hardly notice such a change now would they.
For sure, there is no way for GW to please everyone. This is common sense and it is well known to be impossible. All the displaced masses can only look on with sadness as the great luxury cruise liner, the SSGW steams on, a pale shadow of the greatness she once was. Who knows what destination is next for the SSGW... the SSGW no longer posts her destination, and only makes announcements 1 hour from landfall to "maintain excitement". Even though I left her years ago, I still have the commemorative silver GW cutlery from that ship and I wish her well.
keezus wrote: What I find most interesting is GW's business approach appears be be overly fixated on cutting its losses rather than identifying and correcting what may be underlying deficiencies. This can be seen in their relentless restructuring and cost cutting within their organization, as well as the marginalization and subsequent retirement of their under performing lines.
If GW were a large ocean going cruise ship - this would be akin to ignoring small leaks and then sealing off sections below decks when the leaks turn into bigger leaks. While this kind of action will save the ship, it has the two side effects of displacing the passengers that were in the flooded section (set adrift by GW), and decreasing the amount of the ship that is above water.
Or, on another perspective, you can compare it to what happened with the Boston Molasses disaster of 1919 (yes, that was a real thing - more than twenty people died - crushed, suffocated, or drowned*).
The U.S. Industrial Alcohol Company responded to leaks being spotted in the three million gallon tank by painting it brown, so that the leaks did not show.
Age of Sigmar is a coat of brown paint. The problems are still there, but they are hoping that folks (well, shareholders, anyway) won't notice them.
The Auld Grump - when I was a kid in Boston, you could still smell the molasses on hot summer days.
* If you have ever heard the phrase 'slow as cold molasses'... the molasses on that January day was clocked at 35 miles per hour.... It lifted trains off of their tracks and buildings off of their foundations.
TheAuldGrump wrote: I pretty much loathe the new single pose plastic characters, yes. And I really, really do not like the new 'dynamic' poses.
If there were choices of dynamic poses then it would be great - but having essentially one choice, and all in the same damned pose? Feh.
I love single pose plastic characters that come in 10-20 parts, because they allow for poses and positions that are just not possible with a 2-part mold and 2-4 parts. You can have a head set inside an encasement; a cloak that truly wraps around; the front and back of a tabard; an arm across the chest without any dead space (undercut) between the arm and the chest; et cetera.
I want a box of 10 tactical marine style of infinity choices of these mother fethers right here. Put these out, and I'll spend $200 on 4-5 boxes tomorrow, GW.
I can get bolters, or special and heavy weapons from FW to use on them. Just give me the fething bodies, arms, head, legs, and back packs.
the torsos are Greco-Roman inspired, and the faces are like Roman cavalry officers and Greco-Roman death masks...
the feet are pure medieval sabaton style vs. the power armor rounded boot...
the grieves are way more medieval than the sloping Marine style...
the knees are rimmed like Archaon's armor vs. the rounded Marine knee...
and so on...
I'm not saying they don't have aspects copied from elsewhere that might have originally been Fantasy settings, I'm saying as a whole they look more sci-fi than fantasy (to me at least).
I think largely because of the unrealistic and inhuman bulk. Either the person inside has very weird proportions to the point where it reminds me more of genetic modification (it's not just a big person, it's a freakishly wide person) OR the armour is bulky because it's made from composites rather than from metal.
You can take aspects of historical and fantasy stuff (like you mention) and then feth up the proportions to make it look so unrealistic that it tends to fit better with a futuristic aesthetic.
I'd say some of Forge World's efforts in Space Marines have more of a Fantastical aesthetic than these guys (that is, you could slice off the chain swords, tubes, etc, and they'd fit perfectly well in to a Fantasy setting, IMO more so than the Sigmarines).
seen as how Marines were firmly slotted into the whole "knights in space" idea by 3rd edition, it is not a surprise that you think some of the FW Marines would fit into Fantasy...
though i still disagree on the style of sculpting on Marine armor fitting any historical/Fantasy precedent more than the Eternals, i am not pedantic enough to link all of the 15th and 16th century European armor examples that fit the leg armor of the Eternals...
it looks like we will never agree on the armor style of the Eternals being rooted way more in a historical/Fantasy aesthetic than Marine armor is...
it just seems like i must be crazy, since i am one of the only ones saying that these fit in the long established over-the-top aspect of WFB...
in my opinion, the coolest thing about Fantasy is that it is wide-open...
it doesn't have to be historically accurate, and can be as outlandish and unrealistic as any one individual can handle...
i mean, we are talking about a world inhabited by magical creatures, wizards, Orks, Elves, and all sorts of craziness...
Sigmar's posterboys being proportioned like the biggest Muscle Beach steroid junky doesn't even make me bat an eyelash when we are placing these models in the context of a world inhabited by Dragons and Unicorns...
if i wanted true scale over heroic scale, or reality over fiction, i would collect Perry miniatures, and read about the War of the Roses...
instead, i collect outlandish minis like Wargods of Aegyptus and Warhammer, and read fiction...
the reason there are no FoW minis in my gallery, is that i see miniatures as a way to bring to life, in a small way, the things that only exist in the imagination...
if we were all the same, the world would be a boring place...
You cannot, with a straight face at least, possibly claim that you could show the following to a layperson with no knowledge of GW or deep armour nerdage and not expect them to think they belonged together, or were closely related, at the very least?
Az: why is it so hard for you to understand that i write my posts from my own personal perspective, and not as a representative of some unknown, faceless mass of laypeople???
i can only speak for myself, and no, the Eternals do not look like Sanguinary Guard to me...
the former look Fantasy, and the latter look Sci-Fi...
what others see is fine...
i was just sharing my personal perspective...
is that not how a discussion works???
jah-joshua wrote: Az: why is it so hard for you to understand that i write my posts from my own personal perspective, and not as a representative of some unknown, faceless mass of laypeople???
i can only speak for myself, and no, the Eternals do not look like Sanguinary Guard to me...
the former look Fantasy, and the latter look Sci-Fi...
what others see is fine...
i was just sharing my personal perspective...
is that not how a discussion works???
cheers
jah
Sorry, Jah - but I have to agree with Azreal on that one - they do indeed look like Space Marines to me - or at least minis that very easily could be converted to WH40K*.
They look a heck of a lot closer to 40K than they do to WHFB Empire miniatures, and not just to Azreal and myself. It is a very common reaction.
And that, I think, is where the problem lies - it really is hard for me not to see the similarities, so my kneejerk reaction is that you are being disingenuous, and deliberately not seeing those similarities.
I can believe that you like them - they are not to my taste, but they are well designed figures.
Just figures that do not fit the aesthetics of Warhammer.
But I really do have a hard time believing that you cannot see the similarities to WH40K miniatures.
And, I hate to say it, but to my reckoning... it is less of an insult to think that you are deliberately telling a mistruth about not seeing the similarities than being too... something... to see them.
Personally, I would rather be seen as a scoundrel than as a fool. (And do not think of myself as either.)
Or, less insultingly, you are too caught up in disagreeing to actually try to see how many others look at the figures.
The Auld Grump
* I suspect that they can be converted into excellent Blood Angels.
@TheAuldGrump: my assertion is not to dismiss what you, or Az, or anyone else has to say...
call them whatever you want, dislike them as much as you please...
my point is that, without some heavy resculpting, i could not use these minis to represent anything in 40K...
for Custodes, they would need a new weapon built, a new helmet, and a good bit of sculpting to make the armor match...
as Marines, they would need to have the arms and legs completely resculpted, and be given power armour backpacks, and some power boxes and cables sculpted on...
to me, the figures do fit the aesthetic of Warhammer, because Warhammer is a world of Fantasy, filled with infinite possibilities...
i have seen the Warhammer aesthetic warp a few times in the last 30 years, so i don't have any preconceived notions about what fits, and what doesn't...
that is why i do not just dismiss the Eternals as being Sigmarines, but instead appreciate them as Avatars of Sigmar...
jah-joshua wrote: @TheAuldGrump: my assertion is not to dismiss what you, or Az, or anyone else has to say...
call them whatever you want, dislike them as much as you please...
my point is that, without some heavy resculpting, i could not use these minis to represent anything in 40K...
for Custodes, they would need a new weapon built, a new helmet, and a good bit of sculpting to make the armor match...
as Marines, they would need to have the arms and legs completely resculpted, and be given power armour backpacks, and some power boxes and cables sculpted on...
to me, the figures do fit the aesthetic of Warhammer, because Warhammer is a world of Fantasy, filled with infinite possibilities...
i have seen the Warhammer aesthetic warp a few times in the last 30 years, so i don't have any preconceived notions about what fits, and what doesn't...
that is why i do not just dismiss the Eternals as being Sigmarines, but instead appreciate them as Avatars of Sigmar...
cheers
jah
And yet many, many people have, do, and shall call them exactly that - and not always in dismissal.
In my case, yes, it is fair to say that I am dismissing them - but I would actually be less dismissive of them if they were fielded with bolters and jetpacks in 40K than if they were used in Fantasy.
To me, they remind me of the extra special armour that Dante the Extra Special wore for so many years.
And I gather that there is a whole unit of similar armour for the Blood Angels these days.
as someone who is painting a Sanguinary Guard model as Dante right now, the differences stand-out quite starkly to me...
as to whether that makes me a fool, or a scoundrel, that's for you to decide...
as someone who is painting a Sanguinary Guard model as Dante right now, the differences stand-out quite starkly to me...
as to whether that makes me a fool, or a scoundrel, that's for you to decide...
cheers
jah
Here's mine (though it's very old... I made it when the Sanguinary Guard kit came out, and just rebased it to 32mm to check out the base size) --
Spoiler:
The question is: can you pass the Sanguinary Guard / Dante kitrbash off as a Sigmarite?
@Az: that would be a fair amount of resculpting of the Eternals' legs, the weapon would need a power box, and a Termie back fitted...
like i said, i'm a purist when it comes to minis...
what other people choose to do is their thing...
i am not saying anyone is wrong...
my assertion the whole time has been that they don't look like Marines to MY eye...
you, and 99% percent of Dakka, see it differently to me...
nothing wrong with that...
cheers
jah
Automatically Appended Next Post: i've done one already, too, Talys...
now i am trying to improve on the first one for another client...
i like this kit way more than i like the Sigmarites, personally, but that is because Sci-Fi floats my boat way more than Fantasy...
Jah, you're "pulling a Talys" ie using your own very specific personal thoughts and opinions in order to try and argue against something that is widely accepted in a much broader sense.
Yes, you may not see the similarities but you need to be aware that it is an opinion that diverges from popular opinion to such a degree that many people are going to have a hard time believing it.
Kirby took GW public in 1994, when did the evil GW/Kirby thing start? Did Kirby go Darth Vader?
A disenfranchised player of Yugioh remaked that when people grow up they're wrong to assume what they like will grow with them. The card game has changed but is still the same.
Azreal13 wrote: Jah, you're "pulling a Talys" ie using your own very specific personal thoughts and opinions in order to try and argue against something that is widely accepted in a much broader sense.
Yes, you may not see the similarities but you need to be aware that it is an opinion that diverges from popular opinion to such a degree that many people are going to have a hard time believing it.
that is not a problem...
people are welcome to whatever opinion they choose to form of me, and my perspective...
here is the thing...
this is Dakka Discussions, not Dakka Debates...
i am not trying to argue against what is widely accepted, i am sharing my opinion...
i don't need to win the debate, i just need to share my perspective...
notprop wrote: It must be so much easier for you Az since you can draw on speaking for so many people were as other less able posters can only speak for themselves.
No, I just use my eyes and read other people's posts, it's not fething rocket science.
Azreal13 wrote: Jah, you're "pulling a Talys" ie using your own very specific personal thoughts and opinions in order to try and argue against something that is widely accepted in a much broader sense.
Yes, you may not see the similarities but you need to be aware that it is an opinion that diverges from popular opinion to such a degree that many people are going to have a hard time believing it.
that is not a problem...
people are welcome to whatever opinion they choose to form of me, and my perspective...
here is the thing...
this is Dakka Discussions, not Dakka Debates...
i am not trying to argue against what is widely accepted, i am sharing my opinion...
i don't need to win the debate, i just need to share my perspective...
cheers
jah
I think in this context that's a distinction without a difference.
Tom Kirby was general manager at GW, left, was then asked back, lead a management buyout when Bryan Ansell wanted out and then floated the company some time later. All of that happened between circa 1988 and 1994.
@Az: that is your choice...
i think it is a distinction with a massive difference...
why does it bother you that i share my opinion, just because it differs from what is widely accepted???
is that against the rules of a discussion???
as long as i am not telling people that they are wrong, and that i am right, but am sticking to expressing how i see things, then my opinion should be just as valid as anybody else's...
you don't have to accept my view...
notprop wrote: It must be so much easier for you Az since you can draw on speaking for so many people were as other less able posters can only speak for themselves.
No, I just use my eyes and read other people's posts, it's not fething rocket science.
No waving your hand and dismissing people wouldn't be considered any sort of science would it.
But hey, there's all the other people that agree with you right.
jah-joshua wrote: @Az: that is your choice...
i think it is a distinction with a massive difference...
why does it bother you that i share my opinion, just because it differs from what is widely accepted???
is that against the rules of a discussion???
as long as i am not telling people that they are wrong, and that i am right, but am sticking to expressing how i see things, then my opinion should be just as valid as anybody else's...
you don't have to accept my view...
cheers
jah
What makes you think it bothers me?
Honestly chap, you're starting to develop a persecution complex, I didn't mention it at the time, but yesterday I saw you get defensive and respond to a post that wasn't even referring to you.
But just a bunch of people stating their opinions isn't a discussion, it's just a bunch of people stating their opinions.
A discussion is one person giving their opinion and a bunch of others responding with "are you on meth?!!" Or something similar.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
notprop wrote: You'll get tennis elbow if you keep waving like that.
You're going to have to start typing out the other half of whatever thoughts are in your head, if the rest of us are going to stand a chance.
If you're trying to imply I'm hand waving something away, it would really help to know what.
i've done one already, too, Talys... now i am trying to improve on the first one for another client...
Spoiler:
i like this kit way more than i like the Sigmarites, personally, but that is because Sci-Fi floats my boat way more than Fantasy...
cheers jah
This guy is fantastic, bud. You'll have to share your new, improved one
I want to do a new one as well, and I have a fresh (finecast :( ) Sanguinor and Astorath, too. I think the Sanguinary Guard kit is one of the niceest infantry-sized boxes that GW has ever released.
yesterday i was having a rough day, and feeling quite ill...
headache, and Delhi Belly...
i'm much better today...
a discussion can be an exchange of ideas, but does not always have to reach a consensus...
here we do have a consensus where the majority says the new Eternals look like Space Marines...
i happen to be one of the few that disagree...
i don't need to win the debate, but i am still free to share my opinion...
if that leads you to not take me seriously, then so be it...
it doesn't mean i don't enjoy the discussion...
I struggle to take your opinion that Sigmarines look unlike Space Marines seriously because it flies in the face of what, to me, is fairly conclusive evidence that they're very, very similar.
That doesn't mean I don't take you seriously, that's a totally different thing.
Neither myself, nor anyone I've ever seen on Dakka, has ever tried to argue that a poster isn't free to express their opinion, but, well, Brian Cox said it best in the quote in my sig...
notprop wrote: Tom Kirby was general manager at GW, left, was then asked back, lead a management buyout when Bryan Ansell wanted out and then floated the company some time later. All of that happened between circa 1988 and 1994.
My education in the matter was about 3-4 lines on Stuff of Legends. It crossed me wierd that Kirby is associated with the bad when he was there so long. When GW dropped the Baneblade plastic kit, in all its glory, it revealed that Forgeworld was dated and GW's plastics did it better, with more, at a better price. People still revere Forgeworld, but Forgeworld does not really offer any 'premium' product anymore than say Wyrd. That's just a casual observation, just saying, with no real implication to anyone.
Arguing about opinions is probably the stupidest thing possible. Jah doesn't think they look like space marines, along with some other people. Azreal does, along with some other people. Matter settled.
Personally, they do share similarities to marines insofar as they're big dudes in plate armour, but that's about it. They also share some aesthetics with Sanguinary Guard, which is because they're based on similar things, in this case historical armours. Why isn't there a big uproar because GW are making their minis look too much like greco-romans or spartans, rather than that they're looking too much like each other?
As for the whole Age Of Sigmar debate, it's happened, there are miniatures out there that you could purchase if they appeal to you. If they do then go ahead and paint them up, fine and dandy. If they don't, don't. That's also fine and dandy, you can play with your existing miniatures. And, for the record, they're also still completely usable in WHFB *insert preferred edition here*, and short of a Satanic Verses style mass book burning, they always will be.
I'm far from GW's biggest fan, nor am I their biggest critic, as is apparent, but I personally like the AOS stuff. It's different from Warhammer, but it's also different from WH40k. It also shares similarities to both. That's what happens when you have a sculpting team working on miniatures and rules and lore and all that other stuff.
Personally I'd love it if there was a huge plot twist here and the Sanguinary Guard actually based their armour on ancient descriptions of Sigmarite armour, and it turned out that Sanguinary Guard were the copycats, albeit retrospectively in our eyes.
Fair point there I guess! I wouldn't necessarily say ripping off. Everything, from illustration, to photography. to literature, to sculpture, takes inspiration from somewhere. It's just a matter of how well it's blended into their existing style. In most cases GW, I'd say extremely well. One thing they're good at is making miniatures, regardless of what you believe their other faults are.
They tried to claim halberd as their own trademark.
As well as Roman numerals and a bunch of other highly generic stuff.
Under questioning, Alan Merrett, head of GW IP, denied all outside influence and tried to claim that all GW stuff was created in the studio in a vacuum.
They tried to prosecute the author of a book that used the term "Space Marine" in the title, despite the use of that term predating GW's existence by decades.
Personally no i actually love theyre stuff, especially the 40K stuff.
Now im not a game player more a collector and modeller , when im in the mood. But there isnt much else that grabs my eye, and this could be down to the background and fluff or just the miniatures and the crisp casting of the parts to the models.
Then again a combination of these might be it? But i do enjoy making and painting 40k more than anything.
As far as the new figures go and after looking at them a few times on the GW website I quite like them. Partly due to the way they are on bases similar to 40k as i dont like the tray look with ten or more jammed together with warhammer, and partly as they do have a marine ish look about them but with a difference.
As far as the new starter boxed set is concerned i might get one as again its good value as these starter boxes normally are.
I dont post much but just thought id give my thoughts on this, and yes i do like them and i also hope GW carries on.
If GW did go tits up i would be stuck for what my hobby mainly consists of.
Azreal13 wrote: Ah, so because I'm "jumping" on Jah (and in no way responding to his posts, often because they're a response to mine) you're jumping on me?
Got it.
You actually are jumping on him, by taking offense to the fact that he doesn't look at the Sigmarites the same way you do. He has said in at least two posts he is speaking for himself, and that he doesn't see them as Space Marines. For saying it in as inoffensive fashion as possible you and Gump are either calling him a fool or dumping your opinion that the whole community thinks he's wrong.(incorrect by the way, since I agree with him)
A couple pages earlier in this thread, you were giving advice on how not to argue, yet are going against it by jumping all over someone because you can't accept the fact they are speaking for themselves on how they see a set of toy soldiers.
You seem to have a habit of reading posts wrong, dude.
I didn't take offence, I disagreed.
I don't claim the whole community thought anything, I said most people seemed to think one way.
Grump was being tongue in cheek, something at least Jah seemed to appreciate, even if it slipped past you.
I wasn't giving advice on "how not to argue" I was suggesting that if he wasn't wishing to engage in it, the only way to win was to not respond, because this is the Internet and some smart arse fether is always going to try and get in the last word.
notprop wrote: It must be so much easier for you Az since you can draw on speaking for so many people were as other less able posters can only speak for themselves.
The majority of people call sigmarites, sigmarines, maybe that is a hint? With a little work the sigmarites could be nice custodes. But people do you have to see a disagreement on someone's opinion as an attack? You don't have to be stoic, any Chaos knight in WFB could be easily turned into a chaos marine especially the plastic ones as the parts were/are? interchangeable, And you may say no, but GW's John Blanche was the greatest offender of mixing WFB mini's and 40k stoff to create his inquisitor 28mm retinues, i wonder what he would do with the sigmarites.
Opinions are not an attack on your love for GW, chill relax peoples
I agree with those that say they strongly resemble marines, but get the counter point and focus on key details that distinguish the two lines of models. Seems like one side is focusing macro and the other micro.
Seriously though, do you have any reasonable argument to back that up?
Well, I would like to see another box set with the type of creativity expressed in AoS. I mean, most people think the AoS starter box models are pretty nice (even the folks who don't like the game). I'd like to see other companies make cool plastic minis like that in the variety of sizes and poses in AoS starter.
I would happily buy them!
By the way, I say plastic, because the larger size models like the mounted Celestant or the Prosecutors or the larger Chaos models are just impractical in metal, and fit is often an issue on the really complex resin models.
Seriously though, do you have any reasonable argument to back that up?
Are you being short-sighted? Back up and look at the companies history alone. How can you just snear? I see no other miniatures producer that come close to quality multi-faceted kits. Who else makes anything as complex as a Baneblade with as much extra junk in the wannabe baneblade's trunk? GW's prices aren't that high when you look at quality verses the competition.
Does GW have problems? Yes, of course. Does some of GW's kits suck ass? Absolutely. But point me in the direction of the promised land, please, I desire only a glimps of your milk and honey. Don't deny me.
Snarky jest incoming
At least I'm open-minded and not drunk on Haterade.
GW wanted the space marine tag for Black Library, I don't blame them for trying to stop blatant copycats(chapeterhouse) from sucking GW's bawls. Do something worthwhile, rather than be a shadow.
It's a dog eat dog world
Seriously though, do you have any reasonable argument to back that up?
Well, I would like to see another box set with the type of creativity expressed in AoS. I mean, most people think the AoS starter box models are pretty nice (even the folks who don't like the game). I'd like to see other companies make cool plastic minis like that in the variety of sizes and poses in AoS starter.
I would happily buy them!
By the way, I say plastic, because the larger size models like the mounted Celestant or the Prosecutors or the larger Chaos models are just impractical in metal, and fit is often an issue on the really complex resin models.
On a technical view they are very good. Clean, crisp and only minor issues (Mold lines on shoulder is like their only issue, minor).
But creativity is about creating something new or inventive.
the use of imagination or original ideas to create something; inventiveness.
I think many people don't (and many as in in my experience) see it as something new or original or even imaginative. It feels like they simply took Space Marines and turned them info Fantasy (super above human knightly fully armoured soldiers being the final bulwark against evil etc).
So from a quality and technical standpoint yes they are great. But creatively I think many people sort of saw through that move.
Liking them is fine, I mean putting historical soldiers in the future with some future gadgets is something I love, but it is not creative when you think about it. Its simply taking whats already been done and tweaking it.
GW and their Quality models is something I reckon most people agree is near perfect though.
Seriously though, do you have any reasonable argument to back that up?
Are you being short-sighted? Back up and look at the companies history alone. How can you just snear? I see no other miniatures producer that come close to quality multi-faceted kits. Who else makes anything as complex as a Baneblade with as much extra junk in the wannabe baneblade's trunk? GW's prices aren't that high when you look at quality verses the competition.
Does GW have problems? Yes, of course. Does some of GW's kits suck ass? Absolutely. But point me in the direction of the promised land, please, I desire only a glimps of your milk and honey. Don't deny me.
Snarky jest incoming
At least I'm open-minded and not drunk on Haterade.
GW wanted the space marine tag for Black Library, I don't blame them for trying to stop blatant copycats(chapeterhouse) from sucking GW's bawls. Do something worthwhile, rather than be a shadow.
It's a dog eat dog world
What do you think
Actually, the whole Space Marine ordeal was because GW sent a cease and desist letter to a children's book author who wrote a book called "Spots the Space Marine" , and GW doesn't own a trademark or copyright on the term "Space Marine" which has been in use LONG before GW was even thought of. GW was blatantly trying to be an IP bully when they don't actually own the IP term "Space Marine"
At what point does GW now become measured by AoS alone? Why is AoS a sticking point? It is new; time and stuff; journey of 1000 steps; Rome, built in a day.
My guess is they sent it C&D b/c GW wanted the exclusive tag for Black Library. Everybody under the sun referred to the DOOMguy and the Aliens marines as space marines. I wasn't born yesterday. I don't blame them is all. I like money too.
Seriously though, do you have any reasonable argument to back that up?
Are you being short-sighted? Back up and look at the companies history alone. How can you just snear? I see no other miniatures producer that come close to quality multi-faceted kits. Who else makes anything as complex as a Baneblade with as much extra junk in the wannabe baneblade's trunk? GW's prices aren't that high when you look at quality verses the competition.
Does GW have problems? Yes, of course. Does some of GW's kits suck ass? Absolutely. But point me in the direction of the promised land, please, I desire only a glimps of your milk and honey. Don't deny me.
Snarky jest incoming
At least I'm open-minded and not drunk on Haterade.
GW wanted the space marine tag for Black Library, I don't blame them for trying to stop blatant copycats(chapeterhouse) from sucking GW's bawls. Do something worthwhile, rather than be a shadow.
It's a dog eat dog world
What do you think
Actually, the whole Space Marine ordeal was because GW sent a cease and desist letter to a children's book author who wrote a book called "Spots the Space Marine" , and GW doesn't own a trademark or copyright on the term "Space Marine" which has been in use LONG before GW was even thought of. GW was blatantly trying to be an IP bully when they don't actually own the IP term "Space Marine"
Not to mention those 'blatant copycats' at chapterhouse were in the right and GW resorted to very underhand or downright illegal tactics to try and shut them down, including lying to a judge and trying to steal the rights to a piece of artwork from an artist they used in the past...
Swastakowey wrote: oOn a technical view they are very good. Clean, crisp and only minor issues (Mold lines on shoulder is like their only issue, minor).
But creativity is about creating something new or inventive.
the use of imagination or original ideas to create something; inventiveness.
I think many people don't (and many as in in my experience) see it as something new or original or even imaginative. It feels like they simply took Space Marines and turned them info Fantasy (super above human knightly fully armoured soldiers being the final bulwark against evil etc).
So from a quality and technical standpoint yes they are great. But creatively I think many people sort of saw through that move.
Liking them is fine, I mean putting historical soldiers in the future with some future gadgets is something I love, but it is not creative when you think about it. Its simply taking whats already been done and tweaking it.
GW and their Quality models is something I reckon most people agree is near perfect though.
Well, I will be the first to agree that the Sigmarites and Chaos models aren't original, but I'm sure the creative team was given the constraints of, 'give us superhuman knights versus chaos'. I think by the same standard, models I really love by PP like Bradigus aren't 'original' either, but damn, they're cool.
On the other hand, Adeptus Mechanicus were really original (creative, inventive, though some might say ugly, and others awesome), and in the last year, Nagash, Mortarchs, Glotkin, Treeman and others were really original, in the sense that they are not derivative (they still have to fit into an existing theme of course). As opposed to Devastators and Windriders and Assault Terminators, which were cool and technically excellent but totally iterative.
Swastakowey wrote: oOn a technical view they are very good. Clean, crisp and only minor issues (Mold lines on shoulder is like their only issue, minor).
But creativity is about creating something new or inventive.
the use of imagination or original ideas to create something; inventiveness.
I think many people don't (and many as in in my experience) see it as something new or original or even imaginative. It feels like they simply took Space Marines and turned them info Fantasy (super above human knightly fully armoured soldiers being the final bulwark against evil etc).
So from a quality and technical standpoint yes they are great. But creatively I think many people sort of saw through that move.
Liking them is fine, I mean putting historical soldiers in the future with some future gadgets is something I love, but it is not creative when you think about it. Its simply taking whats already been done and tweaking it.
GW and their Quality models is something I reckon most people agree is near perfect though.
Well, I will be the first to agree that the Sigmarites and Chaos models aren't [i]original[i], but I'm sure the creative team was given the constraints of, 'give us superhuman knights versus chaos'.
On the other hand, Adeptus Mechanics were really original, and in the last tear, Nagash, Mortarchs, Glotkin, Treeman and others were really original, in the sense that they are not derivative (they still have to fit into an existing theme of course). As opposed to Devastators and Windriders and Assault Terminators, which were cool and technically excellent but totally iterative.
Adeptus is somewhat original in some of the models (dragoons) but as many people put they just took what was already done for a lot of it and tweaked it. The robed ranger things for example are simply the same troopers I saw in my 3rd edition book of Imperial guard. But ultimately most of what they do is add or slightly change original ideas. Saying the treeman is original, to me, is like saying the latest Captain America suit is original because it is a different take on the original.
See Tau I would call the last very original thing they did. New Faction, entirely new models etc. Maybe due to a lack of knowledge on my part but they didn't take a single idea from their past and simply add something to it, they legitimately created something new and everything from the initial Tau till now is simply the same old Tau but with minor tweaks here and there.
I would not go as far to call them a bastion of creativity. They certainly started off with something special and so far has managed to keep that special thing going. But creating new ideas and new things is not the norm from GW. Redoing the same things is the norm however.
Aesthetically, they're very close to space marines, but not quite. The shoulder pads though, are very space marines. That round shape with the thick lining is not something you'll find in medieval Europe.
However....
Thematically, they are just like space marines. They're super human warriors that are led by a god-emperor and swoop in to save the day and....you get the picture.
@Swastakowey - I'm cool with all that I mean, I don't agree with you in some respects, but I totally get your perspective; nor is it unreasonable.
@MWHistorian - From the first day I saw Space Marines, I thought they were inspired by medieval knights wearing armored NFL uniforms. Carrying guns!
I can't really imagine that anyone would argue that Sigmarites are inspired by the success of Space Marines. But then again, why not rip off your most successful product line? I'd argue that without Space Marines, 40k wouldn't have been nearly as successful or popular.
Talys wrote: But then again, why not rip off your most successful product line?
There is a risk that the people who are interested in a Space Marine-like faction would just go with actual Space Marines instead. Normally, a rip-off would need to be substantially cheaper than the original to do well, and these are not cheaper than actual Space Marines.
That's the risk.
If you're losing customers (which they are), then I think the last thing you want to do is "more of the same, but with boltstormers instead of stormbolters".
Well, I would like to see another box set with the type of creativity expressed in AoS.
There is nothing especially creative in AoS. The Khornate Chaos look like a Chaos Warrior/Marine hybrid while the Sigmarines look like Marines.
Given that GW was obviously happy to brush decades of gaming history under the carpet they should really have been much more adventurous with the AoS models.
jah-joshua wrote: @Az: that is your choice...
i think it is a distinction with a massive difference...
why does it bother you that i share my opinion, just because it differs from what is widely accepted???
is that against the rules of a discussion???
as long as i am not telling people that they are wrong, and that i am right, but am sticking to expressing how i see things, then my opinion should be just as valid as anybody else's...
you don't have to accept my view...
cheers
jah
Not that he needs anyone to defend him, but I expect it doesn't bother him at all, you're putting words in his mouth. Sharing your different opinion helps him grow as a person!
Personally I think everyone has it backwards. I think Space Marines look like Stormcast, not they other way around.
Space marines are heroic scale super knights ported into space, whereas Stormcast are simply heroic scale knights so are closer to the core of the concept.
Perhaps it is really just convergent evolution as much as by design.
JNC wrote: At what point does GW now become measured by AoS alone? Why is AoS a sticking point? It is new; time and stuff; journey of 1000 steps; Rome, built in a day.
My guess is they sent it C&D b/c GW wanted the exclusive tag for Black Library. Everybody under the sun referred to the DOOMguy and the Aliens marines as space marines. I wasn't born yesterday. I don't blame them is all. I like money too.
AOS actually is the only major new launch from GW since LoTR in 2000. Its rules are modified from WHFB/40K. The models are remiscent of 40K. The fluff is a continuation of WHFB fluff, with names changed to enable GW to trademark them.
If as a wargamer you like to see companies come up with exciting new concepts, AOS is a significant disappointment whatever the merits of the rules and models. GW as by far the largest company in wargames, ought to do better than this.
In addition there is the canning of WHFB, and the various controversies about details of the AOS rules, which have proved far from universally popular with people who should be considered prime customers for GW's output..
These reasons are why AOS deserves to be considered a major sticking point.
JNC wrote: At what point does GW now become measured by AoS alone? Why is AoS a sticking point? It is new; time and stuff; journey of 1000 steps; Rome, built in a day.
My guess is they sent it C&D b/c GW wanted the exclusive tag for Black Library. Everybody under the sun referred to the DOOMguy and the Aliens marines as space marines. I wasn't born yesterday. I don't blame them is all. I like money too.
You don't blame them for abusing a Copyright law (DMCA) from a different country to prevent the sales of a completely unrelated charity book, because they claim to own a trademark for a term coined decades before the company was founded?
Do you also not blame them for claiming they invented Tau in complete isolation, with nothing to do with Anime in an attempt to grow in the Japanese market, or trying to sue other companies into oblivion for having the cheek to sell stuff using such heretical terms as "plasma" "rhino" "halberd" and claiming they invented roman numerals?
Well, I will be the first to agree that the Sigmarites and Chaos models aren't original, but I'm sure the creative team was given the constraints of, 'give us superhuman knights versus chaos'. I think by the same standard, models I really love by PP like Bradigus aren't 'original' either, but damn, they're cool.
I would be stunned if the brief they were given didn't contain the term "space marine". Like, so stunned, that if you can prove it, I'll buy you an AoS box of your choosing.
Azreal13 wrote: Jah, you're "pulling a Talys" ie using your own very specific personal thoughts and opinions in order to try and argue against something that is widely accepted in a much broader sense.
Yes, you may not see the similarities but you need to be aware that it is an opinion that diverges from popular opinion to such a degree that many people are going to have a hard time believing it.
that is not a problem...
people are welcome to whatever opinion they choose to form of me, and my perspective...
here is the thing...
this is Dakka Discussions, not Dakka Debates...
i am not trying to argue against what is widely accepted, i am sharing my opinion...
i don't need to win the debate, i just need to share my perspective...
cheers
jah
No, I'm sorry - this is Dakka Abuse - Dakka Debates is two doors down on the right, and Dakka Discussion is three doors down on the left.
Silly git.
The Auld Grump - guess who was watching Monty Python late into the night with his good lady?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Herzlos wrote: I would be stunned if the brief they were given didn't contain the term "space marine". Like, so stunned, that if you can prove it, I'll buy you an AoS box of your choosing.
I rather suspect that you are correct in that regard.
But I would be amazed if we ever got to see the brief concerned. (Or memo, or note to the designer, scribbled on the back of a fast food restaurant tray liner*, or whatever.)
The Auld Grump
* Fast food tray liners seem to be an important part of my design process, at any rate....
Are you being short-sighted? Back up and look at the companies history alone. How can you just snear? I see no other miniatures producer that come close to quality multi-faceted kits. Who else makes anything as complex as a Baneblade with as much extra junk in the wannabe baneblade's trunk? GW's prices aren't that high when you look at quality verses the competition.
It could be that you are the one who is short-sighted, or at least not that informed as to what exists outside the GW ecosystem.
Yes, GW make some fantastic models but the most complex they are not. I've seen Tamiya kits that were as complex as a baneblade and Dreamforge's Leviathan requires a small screwdriver to put together (included), why? because it's completely posable and makes the GW Knight with its static, bigger dreadnaught pose look silly next to it, $90 at miniature market with a retail of about the same price as the Knight (it's bigger than a knight). Aesthetically it may not be your thing but we're talking kit complexity and Mark, the owner of Dreamforge makes the most complex, detailed kits you'll ever find. I won't even go into the kits that come out of Japan and China that cost a fraction of GW prices and offer multiples of 10 more for modelling and options, look up "Frame Arms". Yes, you can wind up spending about as much as a GW kit if you want bling out your frame but you'll not have to glue anything so changing options later doesn't even require messing with magnets. Again, we're not talking aesthetics here so if you like your models dripping in skulls and purity seals, you're stuck with GW, but mechanically, there are a large number of kits out there that make GW look both overpriced and child-like.
I agree with Talys and others in that GW kits scratch a certain itch that no other manufacturer can but that's all in aesthetic appeal and nothing to do with creativity or complexity.
Are you being short-sighted? Back up and look at the companies history alone. How can you just snear? I see no other miniatures producer that come close to quality multi-faceted kits. Who else makes anything as complex as a Baneblade with as much extra junk in the wannabe baneblade's trunk? GW's prices aren't that high when you look at quality verses the competition.
It could be that you are the one who is short-sighted, or at least not that informed as to what exists outside the GW ecosystem.
Yes, GW make some fantastic models but the most complex they are not. I've seen Tamiya kits that were as complex as a baneblade and Dreamforge's Leviathan requires a small screwdriver to put together (included), why? because it's completely posable and makes the GW Knight with its static, bigger dreadnaught pose look silly next to it, $90 at miniature market with a retail of about the same price as the Knight (it's bigger than a knight). Aesthetically it may not be your thing but we're talking kit complexity and Mark, the owner of Dreamforge makes the most complex, detailed kits you'll ever find. I won't even go into the kits that come out of Japan and China that cost a fraction of GW prices and offer multiples of 10 more for modelling and options, look up "Frame Arms". Yes, you can wind up spending about as much as a GW kit if you want bling out your frame but you'll not have to glue anything so changing options later doesn't even require messing with magnets. Again, we're not talking aesthetics here so if you like your models dripping in skulls and purity seals, you're stuck with GW, but mechanically, there are a large number of kits out there that make GW look both overpriced and child-like.
I agree with Talys and others in that GW kits scratch a certain itch that no other manufacturer can but that's all in aesthetic appeal and nothing to do with creativity or complexity.
You mean like Gundam models with colored plastic, interior detail and is fully poseable?
Are you being short-sighted? Back up and look at the companies history alone. How can you just snear? I see no other miniatures producer that come close to quality multi-faceted kits. Who else makes anything as complex as a Baneblade with as much extra junk in the wannabe baneblade's trunk? GW's prices aren't that high when you look at quality verses the competition.
It could be that you are the one who is short-sighted, or at least not that informed as to what exists outside the GW ecosystem.
Yes, GW make some fantastic models but the most complex they are not. I've seen Tamiya kits that were as complex as a baneblade and Dreamforge's Leviathan requires a small screwdriver to put together (included), why? because it's completely posable and makes the GW Knight with its static, bigger dreadnaught pose look silly next to it, $90 at miniature market with a retail of about the same price as the Knight (it's bigger than a knight). Aesthetically it may not be your thing but we're talking kit complexity and Mark, the owner of Dreamforge makes the most complex, detailed kits you'll ever find. I won't even go into the kits that come out of Japan and China that cost a fraction of GW prices and offer multiples of 10 more for modelling and options, look up "Frame Arms". Yes, you can wind up spending about as much as a GW kit if you want bling out your frame but you'll not have to glue anything so changing options later doesn't even require messing with magnets. Again, we're not talking aesthetics here so if you like your models dripping in skulls and purity seals, you're stuck with GW, but mechanically, there are a large number of kits out there that make GW look both overpriced and child-like.
I agree with Talys and others in that GW kits scratch a certain itch that no other manufacturer can but that's all in aesthetic appeal and nothing to do with creativity or complexity.
You mean like Gundam models with colored plastic, interior detail and is fully poseable?
Spoiler:
Well to be fair, that kit probably costs much more than a GW kit.
Orock wrote: I kind of am. What they have been doing since going public has just completely turned me off to them. However the IP's are too valuable to let languish, so I'm sure someone like Hasbro would snatch them up if they went under.
Aside from those who don't deserve to losing their jobs I can't think of one downside to it. I truly believe almost anyone could run them better at this point.
As much as I'm on the GW hate wagon after the AOS crap show. I always hope that one day, they will wake up and say Forging the Narritive was a stupid idea. After all it's a poor excuse for not doing a good job with rules. It only empowers the: power gamers, WAAC, and TFG mentality. How hard is to understand that we play new people all the time. Hell the draw for me to go and play a tourney was that I get to play 3-4 new people I have never meet before. In 3-4th edition 40K always had a great time win or lose, now 6-7 edition I meet 2-3 Arsehats who are more into breaking the system than having fun with a new person. The best is when I roll my eyes and go "really thats what you brought to the table in a fun game".
Day by day I grow tired of GW and thier crap; 40K gets worse and worse every year, dropped some of the greatest games they ever made (specialist games), loss of a unique fantasy system just so they can look like a half dozen other fantasy games on the market.
When it comes to specialist games and WHFB, they only needed to promote it properly. End Times was on a roll until the Khaine book came out, then most players went WTF.
As to the comment they ignore thier coustomer base, I only believe half of it. In my opinion they listen to the professional gamer (9/10 are also known as: WAAC, TFG) quite well, constant 40K power creep and poor rules is the only proof I need. Right or Wrong I dont care what the GW fanboys think.
Go ahead fanboys keep on praying to the GW idol, they can do no wrong right? Whatever you wouldn't know a good game if it bit you in the arse
If they do fall someday, yes I agree many companies can do a better job.
It just dawned on me that the Age of Sigmar set was a great opportunity to add in more female sculpts to the fantasy range. Considering that most female characters are either wizards and/or special characters who died in the End Times... I guess the Games Workshop Hobby continues to be entrenched in the: AND THEY SHALL KNOW NO FEMALES.
agnosto wrote: Well to be fair, that kit probably costs much more than a GW kit.
Actually, its RRP is ~$120 USD, and it stands 32 cm tall.
So, cheaper than an Imperial Knight for a bigger model of a quality that blows the IK out of the water.
No argument there.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
keezus wrote: It just dawned on me that the Age of Sigmar set was a great opportunity to add in more female sculpts to the fantasy range. Considering that most female characters are either wizards and/or special characters who died in the End Times... I guess the Games Workshop Hobby continues to be entrenched in the: AND THEY SHALL KNOW NO FEMALES.
Wasn't that obvious with the asinine rules about how long your mustache is or how big your beard is?
agnosto wrote: Well to be fair, that kit probably costs much more than a GW kit.
Actually, its RRP is ~$120 USD, and it stands 32 cm tall.
So, cheaper than an Imperial Knight for a bigger model of a quality that blows the IK out of the water.
Models like these are the main reason I've complained about GW pricing for years. Kits like the one above are so far above GW in complexity yet so noticeably less expensive than GW that it makes GW's pricing perplexing to say the least.
agnosto wrote: Well to be fair, that kit probably costs much more than a GW kit.
Actually, its RRP is ~$120 USD, and it stands 32 cm tall.
So, cheaper than an Imperial Knight for a bigger model of a quality that blows the IK out of the water.
Models like these are the main reason I've complained about GW pricing for years. Kits like the one above are so far above GW in complexity yet so noticeably less expensive than GW that it makes GW's pricing perplexing to say the least.
You forgot to take the Sapce Mehrine tax into account.
agnosto wrote: Well to be fair, that kit probably costs much more than a GW kit.
Actually, its RRP is ~$120 USD, and it stands 32 cm tall.
So, cheaper than an Imperial Knight for a bigger model of a quality that blows the IK out of the water.
Well, to be fair, an Imperial Knight is ~$140 RRP, and it's harder to get Gundam kits at the same types of discounts that you typically see GW kits (fewer retailers).
On AoS launch night, I picked up two old ones (no shoulder attachment) for about $85 USD apiece, and the hobbit board game for $60
But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I've never liked Gundam and wouldn't buy them at any price. Robotech, on the other hand...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Saldiven wrote: Models like these are the main reason I've complained about GW pricing for years. Kits like the one above are so far above GW in complexity yet so noticeably less expensive than GW that it makes GW's pricing perplexing to say the least.
You could say that Tamiya scale models or Star Wars models aren't priced relative to Gundam models too, though. I mean, what's the point? They are marketed to totally different people. How many 40k collectors own Gundam or scale models, and vice versa?
To me, stuff like the Gundam model are just toys (not models to build and paint). It's no different than an Optimus Prime in terms of desirability (no matter how awesome the detail of Optimus, I wouldn't want a miniature of him).
Well, to be fair, an Imperial Knight is ~$140 RRP, and it's harder to get Gundam kits at the same types of discounts that you typically see GW kits (fewer retailers).
Which doesn't matter, because a) those discounts exist and the ease is largely irrelevant or non-existent anyways, seeing as how Amazon had discounts which is pretty easy to find and use, and b) factoring in second hand or discounted prices into a discussion likes this is pointless anyways, as each discount varies between games and stores or quality of the second hand mini in question. MSRP is the only reasonable way to measure prices of kits.
But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I've never liked Gundam and wouldn't buy them at any price. Robotech, on the other hand...
No one is arguing otherwise, but the point is that another company makes a larger, better detailed, poseable, and more technical kit for less than what GW is asking for their rough equivalent, countering the earlier point by JNC that no other miniature producer can come close to the quality of multi-faceted kits.
But yes, I prefer robotech looks to Gundam. That Gundam kit made me second guess myself though. Holy feth is that impressive.
keezus wrote: What I find most interesting is GW's business approach appears be be overly fixated on cutting its losses rather than identifying and correcting what may be underlying deficiencies. This can be seen in their relentless restructuring and cost cutting within their organization, as well as the marginalization and subsequent retirement of their under performing lines.
If GW were a large ocean going cruise ship - this would be akin to ignoring small leaks and then sealing off sections below decks when the leaks turn into bigger leaks. While this kind of action will save the ship, it has the two side effects of displacing the passengers that were in the flooded section (set adrift by GW), and decreasing the amount of the ship that is above water.
Over the years, GW has closed off a number of flooded sections below decks - GW Events, NA Games Days, Specialist Games, (RIP Battlefleet Gothic). The passengers that were displaced from these areas initially just milled about on the deck, certain that GW would make things right with them, but eventually, many of them arranged for alternate passage as it became apparent that GW was not interested in their patronage. To fix the shortfall of revenue, GW increased fare prices. This caused some consternation amongst the unwashed masses in steerage and forced many of these people off the ship as well, but caused nary a stir amongst the well heeled in first class.
Most recently the staff of the SSGW noticed that the leak in the WHFB suites had become major and that portion of the boat was barely staying afloat. There were still many paying customers who were stubbornly still staying in their increasingly waterlogged suites, some of which were in first class. Acting according to their doctrine, the SSGW sealed off this area and built a shiny new Age of Sigmar suites and invited their customers to use this area. Many of the guests from the WHFB suites were dismayed that this new area, while shiny, lacked many of the amenities which made the stay in the WHFB suites so enjoyable (rank and flank, points costs) Instead, the new areas provided all the McDonalds you can eat and the room assignments were given out on a "first come first served" basis, with no occupancy limits..! At first they voiced their disbelief - surely the SSGW would carve out a small portion of the new suites for their old clientele. Alas, the only response was that they were invited to keep using the sealed and flooded WHFB compartments. Knowing that their time on the SSGW had ended, many of the former guests from the WHFB suites, they too sadly disembarked, hoping against hope that the SSGW might one day make a place that they could return to.
The proud SSGW is still steaming ahead full speed, safely above water. It remains to be seen if the Age of Sigmar will fully replace, and then eclipse revenue from WHFB... If it doesn't the SSGW might be in danger of capsizing, should she list due to uneven support from AoS and 40k (or even worse, she's taken on too much water to stay afloat in its current incarnation)... in this case, the course of action may be to rechristen the SSGW, the SS40k and cut loose all the damaged areas, restructuring the cruise ship into an exclusive luxury yacht. The first class customers in the 40k suites would hardly notice such a change now would they.
For sure, there is no way for GW to please everyone. This is common sense and it is well known to be impossible. All the displaced masses can only look on with sadness as the great luxury cruise liner, the SSGW steams on, a pale shadow of the greatness she once was. Who knows what destination is next for the SSGW... the SSGW no longer posts her destination, and only makes announcements 1 hour from landfall to "maintain excitement". Even though I left her years ago, I still have the commemorative silver GW cutlery from that ship and I wish her well.
That's an awesome analogy. Rather poetically written as well.
Talys wrote: But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I've never liked Gundam and wouldn't buy them at any price. Robotech, on the other hand...
If Robotech is more your cup of tea: The Bandai 1/72 scale variable fighters from Macross Frontier range from MSRP 3600Y to 6400Y (roughly $30-52 USD). The GW Knight's engineering is positively stone age in comparison to these fully transformable kits.
Talys wrote: To me, stuff like the Gundam model are just toys (not models to build and paint). It's no different than an Optimus Prime in terms of desirability (no matter how awesome the detail of Optimus, I wouldn't want a miniature of him).
Considering that outside of child/casual Gunpla fandom - Building Gunpla is serious business, where the hobbyists definitely "build and paint". There is a ridiculous quantity of aftermarket parts available. I'm not disputing your preference, but I can't agree with your assertion that there is no overlap with niche kits such as Gunpla / Star Wars and your definition of "modelling" as a "build and paint" affair.
The 1/100 scale ones are about $50 (but they're a lot smaller).
Yeah, they may be pretty cool toys, but they seem so much more like action figures than collectible models... I'm just saying they're saying that an RPG sourcebook is really expensive when you put it beside a book on Westeros (Game of Thrones world). They're both fictional books on fictional worlds, but one will cost 3 times more than the other.
The only place I've ever seen a Gundam model assembled is in Japan, and tbh, there are a zillion plastic Gundam-type toys there, some of which look pretty cool (I think they're a lot cheaper there than on Amazon, too, at least from my memory). The Japanese really like their giant robots. But these aren't designed to be model kits like ones from GW or Tamiya. They're prepainted, snap-together action figures (most of them don't even need glue, much less 300+ tiny fidly bits) with a fraction f the number of parts as a model kit... Just a different beast.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @keezus - no disrespect intended for anyone who likes those things, man
Just sayin'... that's just the way I look at Gundam models. I'm not sure how many of the people who always jump to Gundam models as "these are superior to GW in every way" have ever bought a Gundam model
Talys wrote: The only place I've ever seen a Gundam model assembled is in Japan, and tbh, there are a zillion plastic Gundam-type toys there, some of which look pretty cool (I think they're a lot cheaper there than on Amazon, too, at least from my memory). The Japanese really like their giant robots. But these aren't designed to be model kits like ones from GW or Tamiya. They're prepainted, snap-together action figures (most of them don't even need glue) with a fraction f the number of parts as a model kit... Just a different beast.
I understand that Gunpla is not your cup of tea, but I don't see any basis for your claims that the are "not designed to be model kits"... especially when you compare them against GW or Tamiya. GW can not be compared against Tamiya or any other military modelling product. The plastic used is much thinner and less impact resistant, the parts are generally much smaller / fragile and the panels have more fine detail. Military kits are not meant to be handled or played with. If anything, based on detail level, robot kits are substantively more comparable to GW product as the completed product is designed to be handled. I don't understand why the requirement for glue would be a measure of how "serious" a model kit is from a modelling perspective. The fact that Gunpla are snap fit is a feature to make the hobby more accessible. Like with any model, paint and glue is necessary for best effect - in fact, first thing I do is clip 3/4 off the snap fit pegs as they interfere with a perfect fit. Keep in mind, from an engineering perspective, the pegs act simultaneously as an alignment peg, a "snap fit" component AND a mounting point for the joint poly-cap.
I also don't understand why number of parts is an issue! Each model kit, regardless of what it is... contains the number of parts to build the model advertised on the box. Does it build your tank/space marine/robot?!?? Great! Is the new single pose space marine captain worse than the old multipart one? The old one has way more parts! Well... obviously not! The number of parts is neither here nor there and just comes across as a cheap jab.
@Keezus - Number of parts isn't just a cheap jab. Look on many of the kits on GW's website, and they actually say number of parts. It's important for some people, because it describes the complexity of the finished model.
For instance, a 15 part infantry model will be more complex than a 3 part infantry model, because even though both may look great, the 15 part one will have fewer undercuts (dare I say, none), and be in a pose not possible with the 3 part model, due to constraints of 2-part molds. Some people enjoy modelling complex kits, others don't. For instance, do I want a molded cable that's a part of the arm, or do I prefer the cable as a tiny part that I separately glue in? Do I want a 1-piece canopy, or do I want 10 fiddly bits to assemble each piece of the frame, then fill it, sand it, etc? (which requires some skill, by the way)
Please understand that I'm not at all denigrating Gundam models. I just think they're toys marketed to a different audience, so comparing prices isn't particularly helpful, because while a hobbyist into 40k might go and build Privateer Press models, they don't go and buy/build Gundam models (generally speaking).
Also: I see comparisons of "Gundam is cheaper that Imperial Knight!" But I never see comparisons of, "Gundam is cheaper than Judicator!" -- when that's exactly the same logic. People rarely jump on PP for having models that are just as or more expensive than GW. Liking PP more doesn't make their model cheaper
A better comparable, by the way, is the Dreamforge Leviathan. It's targeted to the same crowd, in the same hobby; whereas Gundam is not. But again, if you want to say "The Leviathan is cheaper, so Imperial Knight is a ripoff!" you would need to apply the same logic and say, "The Leviathan is cheaper, so the Judicator is a ripoff!" Neither of which, I think, is fair, because none of these products are a ripoff. They're luxury goods at an arbitrary price, and Bandai and Games Workshop do EXACTLY the same thing. They price the model at the price that they feel would optimize their profit!
To be fair, you need to have a level playing field. I repeat I was not born yesterday. I'm well aware that things exist. But as multi-faceted plastic kits go, GW is awesome. I have no allegiance, but they make stuff I want to buy. If I wanted overpriced mono-pose resin kits, I'd say go elsewhere. If I wanted overpriced crappy resin GW-inspired daemons, I'd go elsewhere. If I wanted crappy infantry, The non-GW mono-pose infantry selections are higher priced than GW's stuff. Mantic need not apply as I have no interest in KoW.
Now if I want Skaven, Necrons, Nids, Night goblins, High/Dark Elves, GW's value in plastic wins out. If Company B starts with the intention to outdo GWlol. The newcrons are one of the sexiest armies out there.
Original and creative are 2 different facets. Saying GW isn't creative b/c they aren't 100% original is spurious. GW produces some original, baller, multi-faceted kits FOR wargaming.
In no way, shape or form have I ever said GW couldn't/shouldn't do better. I don't blame GW for being a business that's trying to protect itself, Have lawyers will shoot, anybody here would sue just as fast and bleed an offender dry, if possible. Don't act like mercy is a common action. The courts are packed with trivial trife. If GW was going to court, why should they not go all out? Get it over with and set the lines of distinction. Why should I care, wasn't my grandma. When they went overboard they got reeled in, everything's gravy now.
GW wrapped up WHFB in a spectacular fashion.
I'd prefer if the Sig guys used bolt-action rifles, personally.
I'm not sure how many of the people who always jump to Gundam models as "these are superior to GW in every way" have ever bought a Gundam model
He has a point, most people who build Gunpla dont know 40K even exists and vice versa.
Even then, I know Gundam is a (decently) popular TV show, but most people keep there love of it at that.
Now I build 40K (obviously) and Gunpla regularly but IMO; Their quality isnt superior or inferior to one another but feel different.
Gunpla feels lighter in a way, and feels much more fragile. As they are meant to be put onto cool poses and then put on display. Never meant for a lot of use.
40K feels heaver, much more thick and dense plastic. Because they are meant to be handled a lot due to them being used constantly in the game.
But both show a lot of detail, and both have people who put a lot of time into making them look the best they can.
Talys wrote: @Keezus - Number of parts isn't just a cheap jab. Look on many of the kits on GW's website, and they actually say number of parts. It's important for some people, because it describes the complexity of the finished model.
For instance, a 15 part infantry model will be more complex than a 3 part infantry model, because even though both may look great, the 15 part one will have fewer undercuts (dare I say, none), and be in a pose not possible with the 3 part model, due to constraints of 2-part molds. Some people enjoy modelling complex kits, others don't. For instance, do I want a molded cable that's a part of the arm, or do I prefer the cable as a tiny part that I separately glue in? Do I want a 1-piece canopy, or do I want 10 fiddly bits to assemble each piece of the frame, then fill it, sand it, etc? (which requires some skill, by the way)
That's a rubbish analogy and you know it. A 15 piece model can be more complex than a 3 part one... but not necessarily. Complexity is introduced to a model kit to serve some purpose (articulation, the ability to model with hatches open, to provide more detail) or deal with some sort of engineering limitation (i.e. undercuts, parts that stick out too far from the mould etc).
Take the bog standard space marine for example. A space marine is assembled in its most basic form with 1x head, 2x torso, 1x backpack, 1x left arm, 1x right arm, 2x pauldron, 1x weapon and 1x leg. That's 10 pieces. How about a Catachan? He's built out of 1x head, 1x torso, 1x left arm, 1x right arm and 1x weapon and 1x legs. He's 6 parts... does this make him less complex? Not really. Does he have less posability? Not really. Could the SM torso also be one piece? It sure could! In fact it is one of my pet peeves that it isn't... there's little reason that the front and backs of the marine body is separate, considering that the backs are all the same!!!!!! You could have optional fronts pre-attached to the identical backs AND save space on the sprues. The rest are option parts. The parts count on the GW website lets the buyer know how many option parts they are getting. Pure parts-count alone means diddly squat when used as measure of complexity. Look at Wyrd's Malifaux kits... they are a billion parts for some reason. There's absolutely zero reason that some fiddly detail like a belt buckle or a ribbon should be a separate piece. This is not "complexity"... it's fething poor engineering. Guys with tubes that need to be glued on? This isn't complexity... it's an engineering workaround as it's not possible to cast it attached to either of the two parts that the hose is supposed to be connected to.
IMHO - more parts by itself is a poor measure of value. More options..? Great. More parts = more complexity? Give me a break.
@ Talys, I think you'll find that just as much effort goes into modelling and painting a Gundam "toy" as does a GW "figure". Please try to keep an open mind about this, I know that you have your preferences, as do we all, but we're discussing complexity of kits as comparison, not subjective matters such as personal preference.
Here's a site with a tutorial on building a "beginning" gundam kit (versus the more involved kits out there) and painting it.
You'll notice some striking similarities between this and what goes into building and painting a GW kit, odd since they're just "toys" in your opinion.
You and I have discussed Dreamforge's kits before and, aesthetics and personal preference aside, the Leviathan kits make GW kits look like toys. Sheer piece count and complexity of the build is through the roof. I'll probably never use the silly thing for anything but it's a beautifully complex model and was so incredibly fun to build.
See the joints on these legs? They're fully posable and pistons actually work.
@agnosto - my point was that a Leviathan is a better direct comparison to an Imperial Knight than a Gundam. I'm not going to wade into which is better, because it's just too much preference, and that debate has been argued to death. Nobody is going to change their minds anyways, so it's a waste of time.
@keezus - it's not rubbish at all. There are poses that are impossible with a small number of parts.
The single greatest problem of onepiece marines is that when arms cross, you have undercuts. You can't model the space between the weapon and the torso. Maybe that's not important to you; it's very important to me. A model which I can paint every part of feels complete, and I'll spend much more time building, than say, a PP metal model with a couple of pieces that has severe undercuts.
The single greatest advantage of multipart marines is the sheer number of combinations possible. You can match different marks of armor, different shoulders, etc. for vastly different looks. If that isn't important to you, space marines aren't being marketed to you. But obviously, since it's GW's best selling product line ever (and I would argue, the greatest reason for 40k's success), it's important to enough people to matter.
They are the only faction of model of any brand that I can imagine and enjoy modelling hundreds of similar infantry of, and it's precisely because there are so many interchangeable parts. As an example, when the upgrade packs came out (which contain 10 unique shoulders, and a number of miscellaneous parts), I bought 10 of each one for each faction (so as to build complete squads with matching shoulders) -- as did many other people. If there's anything GW is great at, it's marketing to and making products for the Space Marine niche.
But anyways, I digress. I have my day off, so I'm gonna paint some drop pods instead of arguing about models on Dakka G'day, man, game on!
you guyz are all crazy. have you seen what the plastic sprue of a Gundam model looks like compare to the plastic sprue on the new age of sigmar box. the detail on a sigmar model crazy better.
you might as well compare gi joe figures to space marines.
i don't own any of the big gundam models, but i got one of the smaller Gundams when i was flying thru narita airport
so it's not a good comparison to imperial knight, but the small ones really are like kids toys compared to sigmar models which is what i meant
the big ones i have seen assembled on store shelves, the parts are not really all that awesome (look at the hands for eg, ik has so much more detail). but end of the day either one can be made to look awesome if you paint it real good.
i think there are a lot more people who buy gundam models than gw models because this is rly popular in japan. but i think a lot more people paint gw models than gundam models, because this is not big at all. i mean, sure, some people do, but its not a big hobby.
Talys wrote: @Keezus - Number of parts isn't just a cheap jab. Look on many of the kits on GW's website, and they actually say number of parts. It's important for some people, because it describes the complexity of the finished model.
For instance, a 15 part infantry model will be more complex than a 3 part infantry model, because even though both may look great, the 15 part one will have fewer undercuts (dare I say, none), and be in a pose not possible with the 3 part model, due to constraints of 2-part molds. Some people enjoy modelling complex kits, others don't. For instance, do I want a molded cable that's a part of the arm, or do I prefer the cable as a tiny part that I separately glue in? Do I want a 1-piece canopy, or do I want 10 fiddly bits to assemble each piece of the frame, then fill it, sand it, etc? (which requires some skill, by the way)
Though another thing to bear in mind with GW is that a kit for ten models may contain sixty pieces - of which forty are used.
Not a complaint - that is one of the things that I like about GW models (and why I wish that more models were as poseable as the earlier kits for Fantasy).
But the number of pieces in the box is not an accurate means to define complexity.
I am not a fan of giant mecha in general - if I were to sit down and try to design the worst possible war machine, mecha would be close to the top. (Especially in Battletech, where the pilot sits in the least armored part of the mech, which is also the first part of the mech to clear the horizon. *BOOM!* Gone before it can make a shot....)
That said... there really is little reason for GW to be charging the amount that they have chosen for their Knight. (Much as I may like the look of the silly thing.)
The Auld Grump
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Zen117 wrote: o yea, the NDK is a better comparison for the medium size Gundam . just look at how much more detail. anyways peace out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote: Right, so your opinion is essentially based on one model you bought in an airport and your own unsubstantiated thinks?
my opinion based on having seen the real thing (both sizes) of both products. and I actually own one. do you?
and whats wrong with an airport, you can buy Gundam stuff in Japan all over the place.
Hell, you can buy some in variety stores in Okinawa.... And I don't think that WH40K ever reached the point where you could buy space marines in a 7-11....
Zen117 wrote: o yea, the NDK is a better comparison for the medium size Gundam . just look at how much more detail. anyways peace out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote: Right, so your opinion is essentially based on one model you bought in an airport and your own unsubstantiated thinks?
my opinion based on having seen the real thing (both sizes) of both products. and I actually own one. do you?
and whats wrong with an airport, you can buy Gundam stuff in Japan all over the place.
None of which supports your argument about who paints what.
Equally, I can buy model kits from the newsagent around the corner, but they're typically very basic, push fit, entry level stuff, was there a model shop in the airport, or is it also likely a simple, non representative, budget kit?
I've owned some Combined Arms kits, and I've seen plenty, not that it really makes any odds.
Azreal13 wrote: I think he meant "you can build two sorts of thing."
Which, of course, GW kits do, and Gundam don't.
Except the ones that transform.
Oh...well that's not anything special, its literally just including an extra sprue for different arms or weapons.
Nothing really technical about their model skills, and they charge you a fortune for the ability to decide which to make.
Hell, the Knight kits are all the same with a weapon swap...I'd hardly call that 'multi-faceted' with a serious face in a discussion defending GW.
At least FW has the balls to make some legitimately different Knights.
*Edit* I'm suspecting the goal poasts are going to sneak away somewhere soon. I imagine it'll be along the line of a gaming piece vs a modelling piece. Which is probably the orange and apples quote. Either way, it soundly puts to rest that GW does not make the best kits, in whatever medium or for whatever purpose.
Its fine to admit GW isn't the best. Its probably healthy for you too. Don't cling to companies. I have an MSI gaming laptop that I absolutely love, but the moment ASUS makes something better, I'll be the first person to jump ship. Likewise, the moment GW gets their act together by either pricing their kits better or offering better value for the price, and by making rules worth the time, effort, and money, I'll be the first person to support them.
Feel free to like what GW makes. They can be your favourite, that's fine. But posting nonsense like 'They're the bestest ever!' is unsupported fanboyism. Don't fall into it. Recognize that other companies make highly detailed models in plastic and other mediums. Recognize that some companies do it better for cheaper. Understand that 40k and AoS are rather flawed rule sets in mostly objective terms, and that other games are universally better balanced, simpler, and smoother to play. You can still enjoy all of that though, but don't fall into the trap of defending something so far as to claim with some certainty they are some indisputable master of everything.
It reminds me all too much of console fan boys who claim certain things without understanding the hardware under the hood.
I own around thirty gundam kits of different scsles and complexity. They are very much centered around the hobby of building and painting. In comparison wargame models are simplistic to build.
Swastakowey wrote: oOn a technical view they are very good. Clean, crisp and only minor issues (Mold lines on shoulder is like their only issue, minor).
But creativity is about creating something new or inventive.
the use of imagination or original ideas to create something; inventiveness.
I think many people don't (and many as in in my experience) see it as something new or original or even imaginative. It feels like they simply took Space Marines and turned them info Fantasy (super above human knightly fully armoured soldiers being the final bulwark against evil etc).
So from a quality and technical standpoint yes they are great. But creatively I think many people sort of saw through that move.
Liking them is fine, I mean putting historical soldiers in the future with some future gadgets is something I love, but it is not creative when you think about it. Its simply taking whats already been done and tweaking it.
GW and their Quality models is something I reckon most people agree is near perfect though.
Well, I will be the first to agree that the Sigmarites and Chaos models aren't [i]original[i], but I'm sure the creative team was given the constraints of, 'give us superhuman knights versus chaos'.
On the other hand, Adeptus Mechanics were really original, and in the last tear, Nagash, Mortarchs, Glotkin, Treeman and others were really original, in the sense that they are not derivative (they still have to fit into an existing theme of course). As opposed to Devastators and Windriders and Assault Terminators, which were cool and technically excellent but totally iterative.
Adeptus is somewhat original in some of the models (dragoons) but as many people put they just took what was already done for a lot of it and tweaked it. The robed ranger things for example are simply the same troopers I saw in my 3rd edition book of Imperial guard. But ultimately most of what they do is add or slightly change original ideas. Saying the treeman is original, to me, is like saying the latest Captain America suit is original because it is a different take on the original.
See Tau I would call the last very original thing they did. New Faction, entirely new models etc. Maybe due to a lack of knowledge on my part but they didn't take a single idea from their past and simply add something to it, they legitimately created something new and everything from the initial Tau till now is simply the same old Tau but with minor tweaks here and there.
I would not go as far to call them a bastion of creativity. They certainly started off with something special and so far has managed to keep that special thing going. But creating new ideas and new things is not the norm from GW. Redoing the same things is the norm however.
That of course is my opinion.
Actually, the Tau were designed by the same person who designed the Protoss for StarCraft, Incidentally, the two races look similar, but each has a distinct characteristic that sets them apart (The Tau not being psychic, having a flatter face, straight, angled armor pieces, battlesuits, alien auxiliaries, etc) (The Protoss have curved armor features, are psychic, only use battlesuits as a last option for the severely injured to have a purpose on the battlefield [see Dragoons, Immortals] )
Talys wrote:Please understand that I'm not at all denigrating Gundam models. I just think they're toys marketed to a different audience, so comparing prices isn't particularly helpful, because while a hobbyist into 40k might go and build Privateer Press models, they don't go and buy/build Gundam models (generally speaking).
Actually Talys, a good number of the 40K and WHFB players around here *do* buy Gundam Kits, myself included. I can't speak for everyone else, but I'm immersed in the story of the Gundam series that I like, I usually try to buy my favorite designs that I've seen from the show (Since I like Gundam 00, the Real-Grade Gundam Exia kit was a must-have) I realize my evidence is purely anecdotal, but making extremely generalized and sweeping statements like yours is also anecdotal, because you don't have as much evidence as you need to make that statement.
JNC wrote:I'm talking about GW and their direct competition. How did you guys jump that far?
Blacksails is countering my apple with an orange.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Gundam kits are not multi-faceted, as much as I'm awares.
You keep using that word, multi-faceted, but I don't think it means what you think it means.
having many different parts : having many facets
Here's an image of the Real-Grade (1/144 scale) Gundam Exia, it has MANY parts, like, a lot more than the new Bloodthirster and Imperial Knights, I'm sure.
Heck, the blade attached to the arm is 4 pieces all by itself! The optional blades that hang off of it are at least 3 pieces each. Beam sabers are 2 pieces each (and there's a few of them, this was the Gundam code-named "Seven Swords" after all) So, Yes, Gundam kits *are* multi-faceted, and I'd say more so than GW kits. Especially since the RG kits have an inner frame you need to assemble and then build onto. You know how much this kit is? $30. For the level of articulation and number of parts, that's one HELL OF A DEAL. I can't wait to have mine painted up to show off.
Spoiler:
Zen117 wrote:i don't own any of the big gundam models, but i got one of the smaller Gundams when i was flying thru narita airport
so it's not a good comparison to imperial knight, but the small ones really are like kids toys compared to sigmar models which is what i meant
the big ones i have seen assembled on store shelves, the parts are not really all that awesome (look at the hands for eg, ik has so much more detail). but end of the day either one can be made to look awesome if you paint it real good.
i think there are a lot more people who buy gundam models than gw models because this is rly popular in japan. but i think a lot more people paint gw models than gundam models, because this is not big at all. i mean, sure, some people do, but its not a big hobby.
Gunpla is also really popular here in America, otherwise every time the local shop restocks kits I would be able to find the kits I want (only to find out they sold them almost as soon as they went on the shelf)
And BTW, the RG kits have hands with individually moving fingers. So... your anecdotal evidence and limited exposure to Gunpla have actually hindered your argument here. I realize my experience is also anecdotal, but given the popularity of Gundam here in America, if it really wasn't that popular, Bandai would've given up on the US market almost entirely, so to Bandai, Gunpla is still profitable in the US.
I've also got 2 (perpetually WIP) Ork Bommas made from planes from Poundland. Recommended by someone on this very site to use them as the base.
I got a few cut-price Star Wars AATs out of Home Bargains. Thinking of using one as an experimental Tau skimmer liberated by Kroot Mercs. I don't think it's very much less complicated or detailed than a GW model. Heck, I was building Harrier jump jets and X-Wings when I was wee, before I discovered GW and wargaming. Even back when I liked GW games, I thought the vehicles were like chunky Tonka trucks in comparison.
Blacksails wrote:Hell, the Knight kits are all the same with a weapon swap...I'd hardly call that 'multi-faceted' with a serious face in a discussion defending GW.
Was pretty disappointed to see that the 40K warden was just a paladin with an extra rocket launcher on top.
Azreal13 wrote: I think he meant "you can build two sorts of thing."
Which, of course, GW kits do, and Gundam don't.
Except the ones that transform.
Oh...well that's not anything special, its literally just including an extra sprue for different arms or weapons.
Nothing really technical about their model skills, and they charge you a fortune for the ability to decide which to make.
Hell, the Knight kits are all the same with a weapon swap...I'd hardly call that 'multi-faceted' with a serious face in a discussion defending GW.
At least FW has the balls to make some legitimately different Knights.
*Edit* I'm suspecting the goal poasts are going to sneak away somewhere soon. I imagine it'll be along the line of a gaming piece vs a modelling piece. Which is probably the orange and apples quote. Either way, it soundly puts to rest that GW does not make the best kits, in whatever medium or for whatever purpose.
Its fine to admit GW isn't the best. Its probably healthy for you too. Don't cling to companies. I have an MSI gaming laptop that I absolutely love, but the moment ASUS makes something better, I'll be the first person to jump ship. Likewise, the moment GW gets their act together by either pricing their kits better or offering better value for the price, and by making rules worth the time, effort, and money, I'll be the first person to support them.
Feel free to like what GW makes. They can be your favourite, that's fine. But posting nonsense like 'They're the bestest ever!' is unsupported fanboyism. Don't fall into it. Recognize that other companies make highly detailed models in plastic and other mediums. Recognize that some companies do it better for cheaper. Understand that 40k and AoS are rather flawed rule sets in mostly objective terms, and that other games are universally better balanced, simpler, and smoother to play. You can still enjoy all of that though, but don't fall into the trap of defending something so far as to claim with some certainty they are some indisputable master of everything.
It reminds me all too much of console fan boys who claim certain things without understanding the hardware under the hood.
For some reason, that post made me think of this..
MWHistorian wrote: I own around thirty gundam kits of different scsles and complexity. They are very much centered around the hobby of building and painting. In comparison wargame models are simplistic to build.
That is an interesting comment as we increasingly see that people who are very keen on GW models don't actually play a lot of games, they buy the models for building and painting.
Choose GW Choose PP Choose a fething big Forge World model
Choose plastic kits, resin kits, even restic if you're a bit odd
Choose pound store glue, medical grade scalpels or GW tools
Choose expensive models, Mantic or convert pound store toys
Choose friends
Choose custom battle foam in personalised cases
Choose spending all night gaming and waking up wondering who the feth you are on a Monday morning
Choose sitting on your arse, gluing gak together while everyone else is going out getting pissed on a Saturday night
Choose sitting in a pile of sprues, realising what you've spent and crying yourself to sleep in the foetal position while your children slowly realise that their inheritance is going to be in Space Marines
Choose wargaming
Choose not having a life.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Blacksails wrote: Well feth me, I don't know how I haven't seen that movie yet, but looks like I know what I'm doing Sunday.
It's awesome, and much more accessible than the book, which is written entirely in Glaswegian.
It's proper dark in places though, I mean proper real world dark.
Azreal13 wrote: Choose GW Choose PP Choose a fething big Forge World model
Choose plastic kits, resin kits, even restic if you're a bit odd
Choose pound store glue, medical grade scalpels or GW tools
Choose expensive models, Mantic or convert pound store toys
Choose friends
Choose custom battle foam in personalised cases
Choose spending all night gaming and waking up wondering who the feth you are on a Monday morning
Choose sitting on your arse, gluing gak together while everyone else is going out getting pissed on a Saturday night
Choose sitting in a pile of sprues, realising what you've spent and crying yourself to sleep in the foetal position while your children slowly realise that their inheritance is going to be in Space Marines
Choose wargaming
Choose not having a life.
Actually, the Tau were designed by the same person who designed the Protoss for StarCraft,
The Protoss predate the Tau by at least 4 years given that the original Starcraft was released in 1997; in addition Andy Chambers didn't work for Blizzard until 2006.
Actually, the Tau were designed by the same person who designed the Protoss for StarCraft,
The Protoss predate the Tau by at least 4 years given that the original Starcraft was released in 1997; in addition Andy Chambers didn't work for Blizzard until 2006.
I thought the Protoss were designed originally by Robert Cirillo? (Who, coincidentally had new Tau concept art that hasn't been used by GW, so I assume the two aren't on terms)
It won't be, at least by my observations. There are 3 stores in my area and all of them have said they are selling fantasy stuff like crazy. One said something like he's sold more fantasy since AoS came out than in the past 2 years (no real big fantasy club in my area). It's all about money for GW and they've made a gak ton by getting lots of new players. Compared to 8th ed, the buy in is very cheap. A battlebox is enough for a whole army. Cheap = more people finanically able to play.
This is just from my observations though, could be different elsewhere.
JNC wrote: I'm talking about GW and their direct competition. How did you guys jump that far?
Then look at the Leviathan Crusader from Dreamforge for the same technical casting level, with more poseability and cheaper price.
Blacksails is countering my apple with an orange.
How so?
Gundam kits are not multi-faceted, as much as I'm awares.
What do you mean by multi-faceted? That is has many features? Because what can I see, Gundam kits have plenty of features that most GW kits don't.
I'm afraid you'll have to be a little more specific in your defense that GW makes the best models and that they're the most creative.
Besides, didn't you mention earlier that you were out of here?
I'm going to be honest with you Blacksails, at kool-aid, I stopped taking you serious. You have provided nothing worth responding to.
"How so"
Because you took someone else's statement at twisted it to fit your kool-aid perspective. If you are not aware of the basic concepts, I can't help you.
Dalek Sec wrote: It won't be, at least by my observations. There are 3 stores in my area and all of them have said they are selling fantasy stuff like crazy. One said something like he's sold more fantasy since AoS came out than in the past 2 years (no real big fantasy club in my area). It's all about money for GW and they've made a gak ton by getting lots of new players. Compared to 8th ed, the buy in is very cheap. A battlebox is enough for a whole army. Cheap = more people finanically able to play.
This is just from my observations though, could be different elsewhere.
Store owners and even store workers will never tell you a product is dead. I would be sacked if I told a customer that X boats hardly sell etc. Everything in any store sells if you ask a salesmen etc. Yes they can say somethings are popular but nothing is ever not popular. This is especially true if a product is supposed to be a major thing.
Someone with more experience can say more, but I usually ignore anything salesmen say because chances are they are lying one way or another. At the very least hiding some of the truth. You don't sell anything with negativity.
JNC wrote: I'm talking about GW and their direct competition. How did you guys jump that far?
Then look at the Leviathan Crusader from Dreamforge for the same technical casting level, with more poseability and cheaper price.
Blacksails is countering my apple with an orange.
How so?
Gundam kits are not multi-faceted, as much as I'm awares.
What do you mean by multi-faceted? That is has many features? Because what can I see, Gundam kits have plenty of features that most GW kits don't.
I'm afraid you'll have to be a little more specific in your defense that GW makes the best models and that they're the most creative.
Besides, didn't you mention earlier that you were out of here?
I'm going to be honest with you Blacksails, at kool-aid, I stopped taking you serious. You have provided nothing worth responding to.
"How so"
Because you took someone else's statement at twisted it to fit your kool-aid perspective. If you are not aware of the basic concepts, I can't help you.
" Out of Here" was 'I'm out' as in going to bed.
So, you're not even going to respond to the fact that you used the term "Multi-faceted" wrong?
*Edit* I'm suspecting the goal poasts are going to sneak away somewhere soon. I imagine it'll be along the line of a gaming piece vs a modelling piece. Which is probably the orange and apples quote. Either way, it soundly puts to rest that GW does not make the best kits, in whatever medium or for whatever purpose.
Its fine to admit GW isn't the best. Its probably healthy for you too. Don't cling to companies. I have an MSI gaming laptop that I absolutely love, but the moment ASUS makes something better, I'll be the first person to jump ship. Likewise, the moment GW gets their act together by either pricing their kits better or offering better value for the price, and by making rules worth the time, effort, and money, I'll be the first person to support them.
Oh my God you're so right, It's you who move.
Who is worshipping GW. I just like and buy what I like
JNC wrote: [
I'm going to be honest with you Blacksails, at kool-aid, I stopped taking you serious. You have provided nothing worth responding to.
Then why didn't you respond? Seems like a cop out the moment someone challenges you.
If it makes you feel any better, you responded in kind, so I could say the same thing to you, but here I am.
"How so"
Because you took someone else's statement at twisted it to fit your kool-aid perspective. If you are not aware of the basic concepts, I can't help you.
Where?
Again, specifics. I am genuinely unsure of what you're trying to point to me, so it would serve the discussion for you to clarify. If you don't want to do that, then fine, but don't act like you're superior for not explaining something.
JNC wrote: I'm talking about GW and their direct competition. How did you guys jump that far?
Then look at the Leviathan Crusader from Dreamforge for the same technical casting level, with more poseability and cheaper price.
Blacksails is countering my apple with an orange.
How so?
Gundam kits are not multi-faceted, as much as I'm awares.
What do you mean by multi-faceted? That is has many features? Because what can I see, Gundam kits have plenty of features that most GW kits don't.
I'm afraid you'll have to be a little more specific in your defense that GW makes the best models and that they're the most creative.
Besides, didn't you mention earlier that you were out of here?
I'm going to be honest with you Blacksails, at kool-aid, I stopped taking you serious. You have provided nothing worth responding to.
"How so"
Because you took someone else's statement at twisted it to fit your kool-aid perspective. If you are not aware of the basic concepts, I can't help you.
" Out of Here" was 'I'm out' as in going to bed.
So, you're not even going to respond to the fact that you used the term "Multi-faceted" wrong?
multi-faceted-having many aspects or phases
How am I wrong? A baneblade can be built to several variants, that cover different aspects of the game.
*Edit* I'm suspecting the goal poasts are going to sneak away somewhere soon. I imagine it'll be along the line of a gaming piece vs a modelling piece. Which is probably the orange and apples quote. Either way, it soundly puts to rest that GW does not make the best kits, in whatever medium or for whatever purpose.
Its fine to admit GW isn't the best. Its probably healthy for you too. Don't cling to companies. I have an MSI gaming laptop that I absolutely love, but the moment ASUS makes something better, I'll be the first person to jump ship. Likewise, the moment GW gets their act together by either pricing their kits better or offering better value for the price, and by making rules worth the time, effort, and money, I'll be the first person to support them.
Oh my God you're so right, It's you who move.
Who is worshipping GW. I just like and buy what I like
Who is worshipping GW. I just like and buy what I like
So in one response, I'm not worth responding to, then immediately after, I'm suddenly worth responding to? Make up your mind here.
How am I moving my position or goal posts? I'm not the one who made the original claim here. Remember it was *you* who posited that GW makes the best kits. After being challenged and shown to be false, you have done nothing to argue the point further.
If you're in here defending GW and getting defensive at comments like 'kool-aid', it'd suggest you take some degree of offense to any criticism aimed against GW. You also stated that GW makes the best kits without any substantial proof or logic, suggesting you're pretty loyal to them, and potentially exclusively so, but I'm not entirely sure.
Again, feel free to clarify, or just leave, or dismiss me, or whatever you want.
JNC wrote: [
I'm going to be honest with you Blacksails, at kool-aid, I stopped taking you serious. You have provided nothing worth responding to.
Then why didn't you respond? Seems like a cop out the moment someone challenges you.
If it makes you feel any better, you responded in kind, so I could say the same thing to you, but here I am.
"How so"
Because you took someone else's statement at twisted it to fit your kool-aid perspective. If you are not aware of the basic concepts, I can't help you.
Where?
Again, specifics. I am genuinely unsure of what you're trying to point to me, so it would serve the discussion for you to clarify. If you don't want to do that, then fine, but don't act like you're superior for not explaining something.
" Out of Here" was 'I'm out' as in going to bed.
Fair enough.
You kool-aid me.
Then move the post as needed, edit after I've already posted my set in stone guidelines for my opinion, like I have already made my case.
You have not provided anything worthwhile.
Procede to keep me Kool-aided up ,passively, while never reponding to any of my assertions.
What am I supposed to do? Agree with you?
Cop out I've been super-clear about everything , replying several times with ample information for you to counter.
JNC wrote: [
I'm going to be honest with you Blacksails, at kool-aid, I stopped taking you serious. You have provided nothing worth responding to.
Then why didn't you respond? Seems like a cop out the moment someone challenges you.
If it makes you feel any better, you responded in kind, so I could say the same thing to you, but here I am.
"How so"
Because you took someone else's statement at twisted it to fit your kool-aid perspective. If you are not aware of the basic concepts, I can't help you.
Where?
Again, specifics. I am genuinely unsure of what you're trying to point to me, so it would serve the discussion for you to clarify. If you don't want to do that, then fine, but don't act like you're superior for not explaining something.
" Out of Here" was 'I'm out' as in going to bed.
Fair enough.
You kool-aid me.
Then move the post as needed, edit after I've already posted my set in stone guidelines for my opinion, like I have already made my case.
You have not provided anything worthwhile.
Procede to keep me Kool-aided up ,passively, while never reponding to any of my assertions.
What am I supposed to do? Agree with you?
Cop out I've been super-clear about everything , replying several times with ample information for you to counter.
JNC - please stop, and refine your argument - act as though somebody other than Blacksail had asked you to clarify.
Because what you have been writing has come across as kind of incoherent - but I suspect that is because you know what you want to say, but are too caught up in annoyance to say it clearly.
Set examples - and then explain how those examples support your argument.
Treat it like a debate, not an argument - because Blacksail is not the only one reading your responses, eh?
At this point, you really have not done a good job of defending your position.
The Auld Grump
*EDIT* Plus, coming across as calm and in control is a heck of a lot harder to counter, and so is more annoying....
I never said GW was da best , never said it. Somebody else said I used a word incorrectly, which I did not. I will not hold it against that person
I am simply stating that GW makes a few models I bought and look forward to buying anymore models they make that I can stick In my D&D games or that are awesome pieces in and of themselves. I stated GW makes models i'm interested in, I don't care for resin or warhammer-centric kits from other producers. I collect D&D minis from WotC and Wizkids so my standards are low, its the fact that mortis engine,coven throne type kits are fun and interesting pieces to work with in multiple ways.
Somebody tried to tell me the world is a big place, I already knew that.
Somebody said I drink Kool-aid, I never understood how that person made that claimb/c they never offered any response, other than parroting another user or two. The example he gave did not fit my objective to simply express I like something.
All my opinions are in the precedeing pages.
I'll never be the best speaker, but I will fight back. I have been as straight forward as possible.
JNC wrote: I never said GW was da best , never said it. Somebody else said I used a word incorrectly, which I did not. I will not hold it against that person
I am simply stating that GW makes a few models I bought and look forward to buying anymore models they make that I can stick In my D&D games or that are awesome pieces in and of themselves. I stated GW makes models i'm interested in, I don't care for resin or warhammer-centric kits from other producers. I collect D&D minis from WotC and Wizkids so my standards are low, its the fact that mortis engine,coven throne type kits are fun and interesting pieces to work with in multiple ways.
Somebody tried to tell me the world is a big place, I already knew that.
Somebody said I drink Kool-aid, I never understood how that person made that claimb/c they never offered any response, other than parroting another user or two. The example he gave did not fit my objective to simply express I like something.
All my opinions are in the precedeing pages.
I'll never be the best speaker, but I will fight back. I have been as straight forward as possible.
You said as a matter of fact "GW is one of the most creative engines out there" Which, isn't true at all, they're just really good at remaking things so that they can put a stamp on them and try to claim IP ownership.
Calling the Baneblade kit "creative" isn't necessarily accurate, It is highly detailed, yes, but it's just a big tank, not exactly creative.
I think it's totally pointless to try to objectively compare a Gundam kit to a Imperial Knight kit. Most people who want an Imperial Knight model don't want a Gundam model, and vice versa, so frankly, who cares?
The value of an item is the highest price that the company's targeted customers will pay for it that maximizes the company's proffit. It doesn't matter what other related items or items with similar technologies sell for, if the customers who are buying the products don't see them as comparable. It doesn't matter how cheap or expensive they are if an individual has no desire to purchase it.
For example: there could be a skid of Gundam OR Imperial Knights in the dollar store for $1 each, and my mother would walk right past them. They're not even worth $1 to her. She wouldn't even take them if they were being given away for free because they'd just be trash. In the same way, I would never pay $700 for a blender, because I have no desire to own a high end blender. But some people swear by and can give you the fifty bazillion reasons why they're worth that. At the same time, even though a "comparable" food processor might be $200, it doesn't matter, because the guy juicing wants the blender.
Also: even on highly comparable products, different products are still different. You can scream all you want that Android tablets are 1/10 the price iPads and run 10x more apps, but if someone wants an iPad, it doesn't matter what the price difference is. Functionality is not equivalence; and if someone wants to play or collect WMH, an Imperial Knight or Gundam model does NOTHING, while a Colossal might.
There is nothing wrong or evil for a company to try to maximize its profits. If it were my company, I would sell every product for the most I could get in medium-term profits. Clearly this is the strategy for Games Workshop and Privateer Press, two of the most successful miniature/gaming companies in this hobby.
Frankly, I would be very happy if people would stop saying "this model is CLEARLY superior to this model", because so much of that is just opinion. Unless someone has a photograph of 2 pieces of plastic on the sprue, and one is "clearly" much better sculpted than the other, it's kind of a baseless argument either way.
My personal preference:
I like my GW models; I don't think they're overpriced relative to the enjoyment I derive from them, and I don't think they're overpriced relative to comparable other products, even if I take out my personal preference. Even assuming that you can get a Gundam 1/60 model at $120 (I didn't see this on Amazon, as was claimed), it's materially the same price as an Imperial Knight for $140, or a Colossal for $135. Either way, I would buy what I want, not go, "hey, I can save $20".
The funny thing is, I don't really like Imperial Knights. Until the Warden release this year, I never owned one (now I own 3, but 2 were the old model, bought at 40% off).
For someone who doesn't like GW models and/or doesn't enjoy 40k: What does it matter if the Imperial Knight is $140 or $85? You're still not going to buy it.
You can replace those product names and prices with any product and any price.
JNC wrote: I never said GW was da best , never said it. Somebody else said I used a word incorrectly, which I did not. I will not hold it against that person
I am simply stating that GW makes a few models I bought and look forward to buying anymore models they make that I can stick In my D&D games or that are awesome pieces in and of themselves. I stated GW makes models i'm interested in, I don't care for resin or warhammer-centric kits from other producers. I collect D&D minis from WotC and Wizkids so my standards are low, its the fact that mortis engine,coven throne type kits are fun and interesting pieces to work with in multiple ways.
Somebody tried to tell me the world is a big place, I already knew that.
Somebody said I drink Kool-aid, I never understood how that person made that claimb/c they never offered any response, other than parroting another user or two. The example he gave did not fit my objective to simply express I like something.
All my opinions are in the precedeing pages.
I'll never be the best speaker, but I will fight back. I have been as straight forward as possible.
You said as a matter of fact "GW is one of the most creative engines out there" Which, isn't true at all, they're just really good at remaking things so that they can put a stamp on them and try to claim IP ownership.
Calling the Baneblade kit "creative" isn't necessarily accurate, It is highly detailed, yes, but it's just a big tank, not exactly creative.
JNC wrote: I never said GW was da best , never said it. Somebody else said I used a word incorrectly, which I did not. I will not hold it against that person
I am simply stating that GW makes a few models I bought and look forward to buying anymore models they make that I can stick In my D&D games or that are awesome pieces in and of themselves. I stated GW makes models i'm interested in, I don't care for resin or warhammer-centric kits from other producers. I collect D&D minis from WotC and Wizkids so my standards are low, its the fact that mortis engine,coven throne type kits are fun and interesting pieces to work with in multiple ways.
Somebody tried to tell me the world is a big place, I already knew that.
Somebody said I drink Kool-aid, I never understood how that person made that claimb/c they never offered any response, other than parroting another user or two. The example he gave did not fit my objective to simply express I like something.
All my opinions are in the precedeing pages.
I'll never be the best speaker, but I will fight back. I have been as straight forward as possible.
You did say GW is the most creative force out there. Which is wrong as people have said.
But I do want to point one thing out... Saying things like Skaven are the best out there etc means nothing when that is up to personal opinion. My favorite ratmen in 28mm scale are these guys:
I have pet rats and I think GW rats look nothing like them. GW love hunch backs on their models (like loves love them) and I think this sets them back big time (among other reasons). However I would not say GW are the worst models out there based on opinion alone.
Then here you have ratmen in smaller scales which also look lovely
In case you dont understand one of your examples of GW being the best involved skaven, but I don't like the Cartoony look of GW chunky hunch back rats and prefer a more realistic look. But that is what I prefer. Reading through your posts your entire argument on why GW is great is based on what you like the look of. Which means nothing if someone disagrees.
Hence why people are picking apart your argument. Because 1 you are incorrect on GW being the most creative force, then your examples are entirely subjective. At the end of the day if you base your argument on personal opinion people will not agree. If you had actual facts on GW being the best then people might agree with you.
Your reply above does not match what you have been saying in the past which is why goal posts have been mentioned.
In all honestly, if you simply paused and thought before saying things you would have put up a post like the one I am replying to and people might have understood and you would not have said some things that lead to people picking it apart.
Talys wrote: I think it's totally pointless to try to objectively compare a Gundam kit to a Imperial Knight kit. Most people who want an Imperial Knight model don't want a Gundam model, and vice versa, so frankly, who cares?
That is an entirely subjective statement, People care because Bandai can make HIPS models that are more highly detailed and multi-faceted and cost a fraction of what GW models cost. Bandai has hit the sweet spot with their Real-Grade line, such incredible articulation and detail on such a small model at $30. A model of comparable size from GW would likely cost upwards of $60+.
This is why we care, it's obviously possibly to make more detailed kits and sell them for less and still be profitable.
Let me ask you this, as a company, would you rather sell 10 $160 kits, or 20 $80 kits?
Just saying, if you cut the price in half, you'd likely sell a LOT more units, and thus make higher profit.
In the example I used above, selling 10 $160 kits would only net $1600, but selling 20 $80 kits gives you the same profit, but you'll likely have more customers because of the low prices. And people are more likely to come back if you offer nice models at decent prices. GW have been overpricing stuff for a while.
Talys wrote: I think it's totally pointless to try to objectively compare a Gundam kit to a Imperial Knight kit. Most people who want an Imperial Knight model don't want a Gundam model, and vice versa, so frankly, who cares?
That is an entirely subjective statement, People care because Bandai can make HIPS models that are more highly detailed and multi-faceted and cost a fraction of what GW models cost. Bandai has hit the sweet spot with their Real-Grade line, such incredible articulation and detail on such a small model at $30. A model of comparable size from GW would likely cost upwards of $60+.
This is why we care, it's obviously possibly to make more detailed kits and sell them for less and still be profitable.
Let me ask you this, as a company, would you rather sell 10 $160 kits, or 20 $80 kits?
Just saying, if you cut the price in half, you'd likely sell a LOT more units, and thus make higher profit.
In the example I used above, selling 10 $160 kits would only net $1600, but selling 20 $80 kits gives you the same profit, but you'll likely have more customers because of the low prices. And people are more likely to come back if you offer nice models at decent prices. GW have been overpricing stuff for a while.
10 $160 kits would be more profitable than 20 $80 kits; however, the sweet spot would be somewhere in between. Obviously, I can't say this for a fact, but I don't believe halving GW's prices would result in double the sales dollars.
I don't know how many people have the thought process: "I want to buy an Imperial Knight, but that Gundam is so much better a deal that I'll buy that instead." (or vice versa, for whatever reason someone might like the IK better). I *really* don't think it's that many cross-shoppers. It's like the people who compare Land Raiders to Abrams Tank models. I honestly don't think there is a lot of cross-over appeal for the majority of the folks buying one or the other.
JNC wrote: I never said GW was da best , never said it. Somebody else said I used a word incorrectly, which I did not. I will not hold it against that person
I am simply stating that GW makes a few models I bought and look forward to buying anymore models they make that I can stick In my D&D games or that are awesome pieces in and of themselves. I stated GW makes models i'm interested in, I don't care for resin or warhammer-centric kits from other producers. I collect D&D minis from WotC and Wizkids so my standards are low, its the fact that mortis engine,coven throne type kits are fun and interesting pieces to work with in multiple ways.
Somebody tried to tell me the world is a big place, I already knew that.
Somebody said I drink Kool-aid, I never understood how that person made that claimb/c they never offered any response, other than parroting another user or two. The example he gave did not fit my objective to simply express I like something.
All my opinions are in the precedeing pages.
I'll never be the best speaker, but I will fight back. I have been as straight forward as possible.
But you had never defended those positions all that well.
Your reply above is a bit better handled.
Saying that the Mortis Engine is 'fun' is quite acceptable - and defensible.
I hate the model - or did, until I saw one that had been turned into a carousel.
But even before seeing the scary-go-round I could not have argued about whether or not you found it fun.
As I said - I think the biggest problem that you are having is that you are 'fighting back' - and losing your thread in the process.
So, take a deep breath, cool down, and then respond.
And try to take positions that you can defend.
GW is not particularly creative - it is, at best, syncretic within a theme.
WH40K borrows heavily from WWI - but GW tried to deny that, and failed badly.
Trying to claim that they were creative, when they were patently borrowing, would not make for a defensible position.
The Auld Grump - an argument is less fun when one side does not know how to argue... and quickly becomes abuse.
Talys wrote: I think it's totally pointless to try to objectively compare a Gundam kit to a Imperial Knight kit. Most people who want an Imperial Knight model don't want a Gundam model, and vice versa, so frankly, who cares?
The value of an item is the highest price that the company's targeted customers will pay for it that maximizes the company's proffit. It doesn't matter what other related items or items with similar technologies sell for, if the customers who are buying the products don't see them as comparable. It doesn't matter how cheap or expensive they are if an individual has no desire to purchase it.
For example: there could be a skid of Gundam OR Imperial Knights in the dollar store for $1 each, and my mother would walk right past them. They're not even worth $1 to her. She wouldn't even take them if they were being given away for free because they'd just be trash. In the same way, I would never pay $700 for a blender, because I have no desire to own a high end blender. But some people swear by and can give you the fifty bazillion reasons why they're worth that. At the same time, even though a "comparable" food processor might be $200, it doesn't matter, because the guy juicing wants the blender.
Also: even on highly comparable products, different products are still different. You can scream all you want that Android tablets are 1/10 the price iPads and run 10x more apps, but if someone wants an iPad, it doesn't matter what the price difference is. Functionality is not equivalence; and if someone wants to play or collect WMH, an Imperial Knight or Gundam model does NOTHING, while a Colossal might.
There is nothing wrong or evil for a company to try to maximize its profits. If it were my company, I would sell every product for the most I could get in medium-term profits. Clearly this is the strategy for Games Workshop and Privateer Press, two of the most successful miniature/gaming companies in this hobby.
Frankly, I would be very happy if people would stop saying "this model is CLEARLY superior to this model", because so much of that is just opinion. Unless someone has a photograph of 2 pieces of plastic on the sprue, and one is "clearly" much better sculpted than the other, it's kind of a baseless argument either way.
My personal preference:
I like my GW models; I don't think they're overpriced relative to the enjoyment I derive from them, and I don't think they're overpriced relative to comparable other products, even if I take out my personal preference. Even assuming that you can get a Gundam 1/60 model at $120 (I didn't see this on Amazon, as was claimed), it's materially the same price as an Imperial Knight for $140, or a Colossal for $135. Either way, I would buy what I want, not go, "hey, I can save $20".
The funny thing is, I don't really like Imperial Knights. Until the Warden release this year, I never owned one (now I own 3, but 2 were the old model, bought at 40% off).
For someone who doesn't like GW models and/or doesn't enjoy 40k: What does it matter if the Imperial Knight is $140 or $85? You're still not going to buy it.
You can replace those product names and prices with any product and any price.
Have to agree with you on that one. A IK or Gundam are absolutely worthless to me. Do I think they are cool models? Sure, they are but I have no use for one and I am not a model collector. I will however be buying the new Menoth colossal when it gets released ( that's if my wife lets me ).
You shouldn't have to ask your wife to buy something man... that's just sucky as (unless you don't earn any money). As long as you paid your bills and saving etc you have no reason not to buy the thing.
I can't imagine being restrained by a women who likely works and earns less than me (like my partner).
Just buy it if you can afford it man.
As for comparing kits I think it is important. Because one kit can show you that another kit could certainly be cheaper and more complex or detailed than the one you originally wanted. You may still purchase it for the look but ultimately it doesn't change the fact you are now paying for looks and not quality. If GW listened to customers then people can say "hey X is cheaper and better, but we like your knight kit and want it more like this with your style" and GW can either say "for X reason we cannot do this" or "when we update the knight kit we will be doing this" etc.
While you can always wave it off as gundam and GW are different I don't think pointing out that the knight could be improved by looking at other model kits is something to ignore. After all we all want better kits.
@Chutes & Talys: i am with you guys on that last point...
how complicated a kit is, or how much cheaper it is, don't matter to me...
the question only boils down to, "Do I want it?"...
if people want to use the metric of a Gundam kit, or a Leviathan, cool...
have fun with your models...
if you want to say that Tamiya or Dragon is technically better than GW, great...
have fun with you tanks...
all it boils down to is which you personally would prefer to buy...
i was at the shop today, and had all of those to choose from, plus PP, Wyrd, Soda-Pop, CMON, and many more...
guess what i walked away with???
yep, that GW Tech-Priest i have been raving about...
GW minis scratch their own itch, which nothing else can quite equate to, but it is not going to be that way for everyone...
some people are going to prefer Gunpla...
as long as everybody feels that they are getting their money's worth for their purchase, it's all good...
personally, i only compare GW to GW...
having watched the evolution of the plastic kits for the last 30 years, i say that GW kits are technically better than they have ever been, and that makes me happy...
that doesn't mean that i can't appreciate a great Robotech kit, or PP minis, but it does mean that nothing is a better buy than a GW kit for me...
i was looking at the 3 large Wyrd Samurai with guns (Sucker Punch style) for $20, which is a very nice price, but even at that price point, i was way more excited about the single Tech-Priest for $36, which is one of the best designed, cut, and cast character kits i have ever seen GW produce...
at the end of the day, all that matters is what grabs your attention the most...
Has this thread not been closed yet. Sure its probably due. Everyone has an opinion. No one will always ever agree. People like Aos, people don`t. That`s it. Frankly GW have had AoS in their heads for years and have been doing it for a while, its not just like they done it all in a day (no I dont care about 4 page rules, get over yourself). They have invested a load of money in it and want it to succeed.
GW will not die cause of AoS, if anything it will survive cause of it. If you dont like it fine, there are plenty other games for you to play. Goodbye, have fun blah, blah, blah
Motograter wrote: Has this thread not been closed yet. Sure its probably due. Everyone has an opinion. No one will always ever agree. People like Aos, people don`t. That`s it. Frankly GW have had AoS in their heads for years and have been doing it for a while, its not just like they done it all in a day (no I dont care about 4 page rules, get over yourself). They have invested a load of money in it and want it to succeed.
GW will not die cause of AoS, if anything it will survive cause of it. If you dont like it fine, there are plenty other games for you to play. Goodbye, have fun blah, blah, blah
Haha years of work. Im sure putting space marines into fantasy and renaming everything took a lot of brain power.
I bet battle shock alone took months to implement in their ruleset.
Honestly I think they put in more work finding out the best names to keep themselves trademarked etc than they did anything else. It probably dictated their model kits too.
Okay, Swastakowey & some others, fair enough: if the technology that Bandai uses is superior to the technology that GW (or PP/Dreamforge) uses, it's interesting to discuss because then these companies could be using that technology to make better models.
I still stand my point that there is very little cross-appeal, but the point of what's possible merits comparison. I maintain that price is academic, because they are different markets. But I include them in the research anyhow.
If someone can find better sprues or information, I'm all ears. Bandai doesn't list MSRPs on their website, so I could only go by what I could find, but I think I was being pretty objective in fact-finding.
If you look on Gundamplanet.com (which seems to sell pretty much every current Gundam model), the price of 1/60 size Gundam models seem to START at about $140. For example:
Perhaps these models can be found at a better price elsewhere. I couldn't find lower prices at anywhere that didn't look suspicious, and the official site says, "beware of fake product" or some such. But then again, you could say the same thing about GW products. An Imperial Knight is exactly the same price, I think -- $140 (and of course Warden is a little more). 25% - 30% discounts are not uncommon in the GW universe. Since I don't buy Gundam models, I have no idea what a typical discount might be.
Here are some high resolution pictures of some Gundam sprues, taken at a high enough resolution to compare with Imperial Knight. I'm not cherry picking; there wasn't much I could find, and nothing official. I did my best; most pictures are too low a resolution to clearly see. For example:
Trying to be totally objective, and looking at the pieces that I could find on Google and Bing images, the plastic sculpting on Gundam models is not "much better" than GW's sculpting and tooling on Imperial Knight. Personally, I don't think IK has more detail in the individual pieces of plastic, but I don't want to get into that debate; I just don't think it's better in an appreciable way that would make us say, "GW has inferior modelmaking technology". Again, if someone has better sprue pictures that show of super-sophisticated sprues, I'm happy to re-evaluate.
In terms of price, I see no indication that Gundam models from an official reseller is any cheaper. Again, I have limited information: Google, Amazon. The prices seem consistent.
I do not consider Ebay a legitimate place to obtain pricing information on either GW or Bandai models, because we're just as likely as anything to hit a knockoff. But I'm totally willing to consider that these prices are grossly inflated and independent stores sell them for a lot less (again, I have no idea; I can only go by what I see).
Edit: By he way, looking at the pictures of the sprues, Gundam models look like they are made using the same types of materials and processes of a Tamiya electric model drill I own (it comes on sprues and you have to build it yourself).
It does seem likely to me that the primary driver for the whole WHFB reboot, beyond ailing sales figures, was the protectable-IP aspect of it.
The bean counters look at something like Skaven or Lizardmen and think, "Wow, that's so original and brilliant!" because they're just bean counters and not gamers, and they don't realize these concepts have been around for decades. Then they go out for a few games of lawyer ball, thinking they can protect this "Intellectual Property" and get their butts handed to them trying to claim copyright infringement on halberds and skulls.
A few months later, a meeting is called. The tone of the meeting is, "hey, we're really losing a lot of money here because we have all this stuff we can't protect. How can we make it protectable?" Six months down the line, the generic WHFB is blown up and now we have Space-Marine-looking good guys with super special names that can be protected in a court of law. Hooray!
At least, that's how I figure it went down, based on the company's past behaviors and having seen corporate whitewashing and bean counting ruin plenty of great things in the past.
So yes, I hope this accelerates the spiral because it's the best chance for a glorious rebirth of all the great things GW has done in the past and since abandoned in the name of profit and shareholders.
For models, the clutter of detail is a design choice not an improvement. Things in real life do not have detail covering the majority of the surface etc.
If Gundam wanted to they too could clutter their models with detail.
I think you will find the only difference is clutter of detail, but this does not make one kit better than another. I personally prefer less detail to keep things looking more real.
I think a lot of people make this mistake, they look at a GW model and see everything cluttered with some symbol, vent or whatever they can to fill the space but that does not equal better. Just like having 1 million words in your essay does not make it better.
From a model kit perspective I think Gundam wins. I dont buy them, but I used gundam modeler tutorials to make some cool bases for my dioramas. They seem pretty posable (they sell stands for people who want to pose them but not base them, so that more poses become viable). The knight requires extra work and care just to position its stumpy legs differently.
I know you didn't mention but just putting it out there that detail clutter is not a sign of superior kits, but a design choice most people can make when creating miniatures.
Talys wrote:They go way up, to $300+ from there. here is a list of "Perfect Grade" which is just their word for 1/60:
Perfect Grade (PG) is a series of 1/60 scale Gunpla kits created by Bandai. The PG line originated with the release of the Perfect Grade Evangelion EVA-01. The line was later transferred to the Gundam franchise in 1998 and has since become exclusive to Gundam. The PG line has significant external and internal details, and recent ones have featured light up gimmicks with LEDs. The PGs are some of the most expensive Gunpla produced and have sometimes been used to develop Master Grade and Real Grade technology.
Talys wrote:They go way up, to $300+ from there. here is a list of "Perfect Grade" which is just their word for 1/60:
Perfect Grade (PG) is a series of 1/60 scale Gunpla kits created by Bandai. The PG line originated with the release of the Perfect Grade Evangelion EVA-01. The line was later transferred to the Gundam franchise in 1998 and has since become exclusive to Gundam. The PG line has significant external and internal details, and recent ones have featured light up gimmicks with LEDs. The PGs are some of the most expensive Gunpla produced and have sometimes been used to develop Master Grade and Real Grade technology.
Perfect Grade 1/60 Master Grade are 1/100 High Grade 1/144 Real Grade 1/144
There is no point in comparing any model other than Perfect Grade with Imperial Knight, because they other ones are just too small. Master Grade range from about $60 - $140, but obviously are 40% smaller. And 1/144 is a small model.
For comparing "how good is that model?" we might as well take the highest quality model.
And just step back and look at the the plastic bits, you notice that Gundam models have a lot more smooth, flat plated surfaces compared to PP/GW/DF "Knight" sized models. The IK has TONS more hoses, connectors, surface boxes and etched relief on the plates of armor. So do PP Colossals, by the way. In fact, on the IK, the only smooth, flat surfaces are the ones that you're intended to put decals or paint freehand onto.
Note that I'm not trying to reinvigorate the "this is better" argument. I far prefer "these are different". I would highly encourage anyone who wants to compare the products to go look at the whole product line (it doesn't take long) on the Gundamplanet website; taking the product lines as a whole, you'll see that is targeted to a different audience. But buy what you like! Just trying to get some facts out there, is all.
All perfect grade are 1/60, not all 1/60 are perfect grade.
This guy, as best as I can tell from the pics, is larger than a FW Knight, much bulkier, comes with a sheet of decals the equal of any of the new stuff (for free, not an extra £15) and includes a modest LED lighting kit and the display stand.
With a 20% discount for approximately $160, and represents the top end. The $300 kit Talys cites was, in fact, an online exclusive, and we all know how GW loves to squeeze the buyers of those.
Looking at that model Az, there are some sprue pictures. Not the best. The individual pieces of plastic cut on the sprue don't really look "better" than anything in particular, though, and the details do not seem to be as fine as you would see on GW models; for example, if you look on the leg, which is plenty detailed, each tooled detail is quite heavy-handed (wide and thick), whereas GW models will have extremely fine, intricate detail -- I like to call it a filigree look. Then again, the GW model was designed to be lovingly painted. The Gundam models were not designed with that in mind (though of course you CAN paint them), as evidenced by a quick google or bing image search yielding very few custom painted models and pages of unpainted models.
By the way, I simply picked a cool-looking $300 kit. But if you like Gundam, why not go spend $300 on a kit. The prices seem pretty reasonable to me. They just don't seem orders of magnitude better than GW models.
But once again, it's just what you want in a model.
MWHistorian wrote: 1/100 is about the size of a IK. I got my Turn A 1/100 for $35. It's crazy posable, very intricate and has a lot of weapon options.
All subjective (aka. useless) debates aside, looking at IK and a 1/100 gundam kit, there is not comparison.
And yes, Gundam does compete for my table top gaming money.
you are right, looking at those two kits, there is no comparison, because the IK looks way cooler...
if you are a fan of the 40K aesthetic, then the Gundam has no value, and vice-versa...
Talys wrote: Then again, the GW model was designed to be lovingly painted. The Gundam models were not designed with that in mind (though of course you CAN paint them), as evidenced by a quick google or bing image search yielding very few custom painted models and pages of unpainted models.
You would find much of the same if you Googled GW models, though, so you can't argue that they aren't "meant to be painted" based on that. Indeed, if grey armies weren't such a common thing you wouldn't see threads complaining about it so much on Dakka as if it were some terrible epidemic.
Gundam models are meant to be painted, they're just molded in colored plastic so they don't have to be. If you ever buy a kit yourself, mostly on the cheaper ones like 1/144 scale, you'll see details sculpted on the plastic that you can easily tell are supposed to be painted in a color different to what they were molded in, just by observing the box art or the painted examples of the model. For the cheaper kits you typically get a sticker sheet for those parts, but I've never really liked the stickers that much. Most of the pictures you see on GundamPlanet are most likely painted models, too. It's hard to tell sometimes because the shading and highlighting is very subtle, just enough to provide some depth while keeping that straight out of an anime look.
I also think you're comparing the GW Knight to the wrong scale, as pointed out already. Knights are barely 6" tall, if I'm not mistaken, and aren't very posable unless you get adventurous and start cutting up your $140+ kit to achieve it. From GundamPlanet the Gundam kits break down as follows:
And while you'll likely find 1/60 scale Gundams that cost a fair deal more than the Knight does, they're also going to be significantly taller on average, contain a lot more parts, have a great deal more posability, interesting gimmicks like LED lights and moving/sliding parts or compartments, and many of them supposedly require no paint whatsoever. You can argue all day long that the Knight is "better" because you personally prefer the aesthetic of the Knight, but objectively, I think it's hard to argue that the Knight is a better kit, especially for the price.
And yeah, if you buy a brand new GW kit at release, they usually have some nice, sharp detail, can't argue with that. Buy one later though and it's less likely those details will still be sharp. I bought a new Tau fire warrior kit two years ago and the parts look awful compared to some of the ones I have from 4th edition. I can't really praise GW's quality when they'll keep trying to sell people kits long after the point where the molds should have been replaced, and still charge top dollar for them. Oh, and on that note, there's a pair of legs in that fire warrior kit that as far as I can tell has always been miscast; a pair of running legs where the armor panels on the left leg kinda "stretch" and look like a mess, and GW is so concerned with quality and detail that they've done absolutely jack gak about it this whole time.
Wait, so because Gundam models are outfitted with a lot of unnecessary details just for the sake of having detail, that makes GW sprues better?
For those who think Gundams can't be compared to Imperial Knights, think of it this way: if Imperial Knights that are fully poseable, with modelled interiors, and come in colored plastics that can serve as a basecoat if you so wish... would you still prefer the original Imperial Knights? That removes all the subjective "Gundams aren't really my thing" argument.
Also off-topic to jah:
Spoiler:
Ellipsis (plural ellipses; from the Ancient Greek: ἔλλειψις, élleipsis, "omission" or "falling short") is a series of dots that usually indicates an intentional omission of a word, sentence, or whole section from a text without altering its original meaning.[1] Depending on their context and placement in a sentence, ellipses can also indicate an unfinished thought, a leading statement, a slight pause, a mysterious, echoing voice, or a nervous or awkward silence.
Why do you use them in every sentence? It makes it look like your thoughts are always unfinished, or you haven't said everything you want to say, or you're just trying to sound mysterious/nervous/awkward. Or you're always pausing and it sounds like perpetually stoned when you type like that.
Your arguments will be perceived by how you write your sentences (because it's hard enough as it is to perceive tone of voice in written communication!) and I'm sure people will respond to you better if you don't type like that? Just like typing in all caps will make it look like you're always shouting, typing in ellipses make it look like you're always pausing as if your thoughts are perpetually unfinished.
The technology exists to make better models and more efficiently as well, so why aren't they using those methods? PS, I've never gotten a miscast Gunpla kit, but I've gotten many, *many* miscast GW models...
It did get to me, coming out calling someone a koolaid drinker, then not even responding in his own words, useing someone else's as cover irked me. I do not agree that Gundum is the be-all-end-all peer that showed GW is not creative. I don't believe the Imperial Knight comparison example had anything to do with my point that I like some of GW's kits nd think GW is a creative engine.
I wrote these.....
JNC-
Does GW have problems? Yes, of course. Does some of GW's kits suck ass? Absolutely
JNC--
In no way, shape or form have I ever said GW couldn't/shouldn't do better.
...and got this
Blacksails
*Edit* I'm suspecting the goal poasts are going to sneak away somewhere soon. I imagine it'll be along the line of a gaming piece vs a modelling piece. Which is probably the orange and apples quote. Either way, it soundly puts to rest that GW does not make the best kits, in whatever medium or for whatever purpose.
The goal post moved so far out of my original parameters that they flew into space with mechs. I never accepted that Imperial Knights are a comparison to me liking a Mortis Engine. His example used something I did not agree with and then told me I was completely wrong b/c he believes, at another poster's word, that Gundum are the best model kits ever.
...and this
Blacksails
Its fine to admit GW isn't the best. Its probably healthy for you too. Don't cling to companies.
Was there really a debate/discussion. There was nothing but GW fanboi for me. These were the most important info he supplied, I was sloppy and seeing red.
"is one of the most creative" does not mean pre-eminent. I would never associate the Imperial titan with breathtaking creativity, The baneblade is an older kit, it's still is one of the best tank kits they offer, but I never expected that GW models would be tested against product that are not its peers or dates of birth close together. Privateer Press Mantic, Infinity, are the other game-centric companies are what I wanted/believed were the suitable competition.
Within wargaming, I'm not seeing the vast difference people are talking about. I'm looking into the product people mention, but my focus on creativity isn't what everybody else is talking about. If GW isn't creative why do they offer kits nobody else does, or that others copy? I'm not 'GW only' but there's not as many products that say 'buy me' from the other offerings. Cool only goes so far, usefulness is preferred.
I don't play 40k but the new Necrons are good kits and an awesome army. Skaven are ratmen but they have some really good kits, GW does a great job with the new armies, the kits are better/more creative than ever. I don't take AoS serious as the grave b/c it is new.
Saying GW is not creative b/c they are not original is absurd. Creativity is not measured in what's new, but what did you do with what you have. GW made dumb cyborg/robots and rats into a great army. The kits that make up the Necron/Skaven selection are really good(IMO) and that's all I want to say. I see creativity in what can you do with a kit aswell. True, there's no wall blocking anyone from doing that with anything
The amount of stuff you can buy is too vast to ever really get a hold on what's 'the best', but if I'm buying, GW has stuff I can use/do like, A coven throne is a great epic tier encounter, I'd love if other companies made stuff I could use, but they just want to make more little marines/orks/titans. Even the AoS Sig guys can be used as Angels for the Astral Sea.
I have no reason to just dismiss GW b/c of somebody else's reasons. I don't see the prices of individual kits as high anymore b/c everything else is high. Gw has done nothing wrong to me either.
I stand by GW being a creative engine.
aside-If Hasbro bought GW, would not they just license out to Wizkids? Do you wanna play warhammer-clix that bad
Gundam* Seriously, please attempt to spell the subject matter correctly when addressing it.
You're fine to have opinions, but you came in hot declaring it as a fact. Which, the facts don't lie, GW just aren't as creative as they used to be, a lot of their *older* sculpts, are more creative than the crap we have now. If you want proof, look at the Chaos Range.
Look at the evolution of the Pink/Blue horrors of Tzeentch, we had these awesome, freaky and amorphous sculpts for 3rd-4th edition 40K, you even had the Blue horrors trying to rip and tear their way out from inside a Pink Horror. It was truly the stuff of nightmares which is EXACTLY what Tzeentch Daemons *should* be. Now, we have pink monkeys with feathers and ork teeth and beaks... Really? We went from Gothic Horror, to mash up comedy.
The Daemon Prince went from ascended Prince to Saturday morning Cartoon Villain with a slim hourglass figure. Ugh...
Chaos Raptors - went from heavy metal, carrion bird (vulture) type Marines to cartoony, jagged, funky looking models... Kinda turned me off of buying them.
Possessed - Everyone knows the issues with the possessed kit, the fact of only being able to assemble two good looking models is absurd.
Daemonettes - Not the image of deadly beauty they used to be. Especially once they gave them crabclaws... Ugh... I want my rending talons back! Daemonettes were supposed to be elegant beautiful women with daemonic appendages, now they look like women/turkey hermaphrodites. Again, a joke
About the only positive change in the Chaos range in the past 7-8 years has been the Plastic Bloodletters, which actually look like fething daemons! Khorne seems to luck out on stuff like that.
Hailing them as being "a Creative engine" is entirely your opinion, one not popular and doesn't add to the discussion at all.
The technology exists to make better models and more efficiently as well, so why aren't they using those methods? PS, I've never gotten a miscast Gunpla kit, but I've gotten many, *many* miscast GW models...
Perhaps you could share with us photos of some of the Gunpla kits, both new-on-sprue so that we may appreciate some of this Gundam awesomeness. I have yet to see a sprue that has really wowed me, the way, for instantce, Lord Celestant did, when I saw him.
With regards to GW plastic kits, sure there are plastics that are imperfect, though every kit is identically imperfect (it was a tooling error, not a production error). Dark vengeance is a great example; the tactical markings many of the right shoulder pads require remediation if you want them to look great. There are numerous vehicles with slight fit problems, though they are very minor (and generally acceptable to most people).
On the other hand, as you approach models manufactured in 2015, the quality has really skyrocketed. I'm not sure if there are any miscasts at all in the AoS starter box. Blood Angels Tacticals had no miscasts -- not even one (take it from a guy who's cleaned up almost all the bits from 7 boxes of them, so far), the assault terminators were perfect, the AdMech models that I've fiddled with have the precision of a Swiss watch. The Devastator and Assault marines fit absolutely perfectly, and I would challenge someone to find a single miscast on either of those kits. I haven't used *every* bit on them yet, but I've cleaned up all the bits going through 2 boxes of each, I haven't noticed any tooling errors yet. Not one! The Windriders, ditto. Harlequins too.
Frankly, I'm amazed. But I repeat -- I would love to see closeups of unassembled Gunpla parts to see their technical marvel of which you speak.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
PlaguelordHobbyServices wrote: Hailing them as being "a Creative engine" is entirely your opinion, one not popular and doesn't add to the discussion at all.
GW's creativity has more to do with AoS and GW's future (the topic of this discussion) than Gundam and Imperial Knights, though.
Some people look at GW and say, "Boring!" Others salivate. If you like their stuff, you're gonna say they're creative. If you don't like their stuff, you're going to say the opposite. Neither of which actually has to do with creativity, because a company that's very creative can make ugly-assed stuff, too. But bias is impossible to rid oneself of. You're unlikely to call something very creative if you think it's ugly.
In JNC's defense, GW's "creativity" or whatever you call it, is still a popular enough an opinion to make them lots of money. Keep in mind that most of the people who are happy with GW just happily model their stuff instead of come here. Which is what I need to go back to doing... I avoided posting on Dakka forever, and now I am splitting my hobby time with posting about what's creative
Lord, what's wrong with me! >> scurries back to stack of drop pods <<
MWHistorian wrote: I own around thirty gundam kits of different scsles and complexity. They are very much centered around the hobby of building and painting. In comparison wargame models are simplistic to build.
That is an interesting comment as we increasingly see that people who are very keen on GW models don't actually play a lot of games, they buy the models for building and painting.
That is not completely true especially now with gundam Build fighters
Exhibit A!
The technology exists to make better models and more efficiently as well, so why aren't they using those methods? PS, I've never gotten a miscast Gunpla kit, but I've gotten many, *many* miscast GW models...
Perhaps you could share with us photos of some of the Gunpla kits, both new-on-sprue so that we may appreciate some of this Gundam awesomeness. I have yet to see a sprue that has really wowed me, the way, for instantce, Lord Celestant did, when I saw him.
With regards to GW plastic kits, sure there are plastics that are imperfect, though every kit is identically imperfect (it was a tooling error, not a production error). Dark vengeance is a great example; the tactical markings many of the right shoulder pads require remediation if you want them to look great. There are numerous vehicles with slight fit problems, though they are very minor (and generally acceptable to most people).
On the other hand, as you approach models manufactured in 2015, the quality has really skyrocketed. I'm not sure if there are any miscasts at all in the AoS starter box. Blood Angels Tacticals had no miscasts -- not even one (take it from a guy who's cleaned up almost all the bits from 7 boxes of them, so far), the assault terminators were perfect, the AdMech models that I've fiddled with have the precision of a Swiss watch. The Devastator and Assault marines fit absolutely perfectly, and I would challenge someone to find a single miscast on either of those kits. I haven't used *every* bit on them yet, but I've cleaned up all the bits going through 2 boxes of each, I haven't noticed any tooling errors yet. Not one! The Windriders, ditto. Harlequins too.
Frankly, I'm amazed. But I repeat -- I would love to see closeups of unassembled Gunpla parts to see their technical marvel of which you speak.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
PlaguelordHobbyServices wrote: Hailing them as being "a Creative engine" is entirely your opinion, one not popular and doesn't add to the discussion at all.
GW's creativity has more to do with AoS and GW's future (the topic of this discussion) than Gundam and Imperial Knights, though.
Some people look at GW and say, "Boring!" Others salivate. If you like their stuff, you're gonna say they're creative. If you don't like their stuff, you're going to say the opposite. Neither of which actually has to do with creativity, because a company that's very creative can make ugly-assed stuff, too. But bias is impossible to rid oneself of. You're unlikely to call something very creative if you think it's ugly.
In JNC's defense, GW's "creativity" or whatever you call it, is still a popular enough an opinion to make them lots of money. Keep in mind that most of the people who are happy with GW just happily model their stuff instead of come here. Which is what I need to go back to doing... I avoided posting on Dakka forever, and now I am splitting my hobby time with posting about what's creative
Lord, what's wrong with me! >> scurries back to stack of drop pods <<
I only assembled the frame for my Real Grade Exia so far, I could take some photos of the sprues I suppose, but it's packed away, I'd have to dig it out, the only thing I have at the ready is a High grade Gundam Fenice Rinsacita, which doesn't have the best detail, High grade is the beginner level for Gunpla, usually they aren't very detailed, etc. Real Grade is for people who want the Master Grade feel, but don't want to shell out for MG or PG, The RG kits are spectacular, and the Gundam Astray Red Frame RG kit actually has an inner frame based on the human skeleton to give it the best possible range of motion, etc. And keep in mind, this is all without fumbling with magnets, etc.
i would not complain if the IK models had more posability, even if it was just the legs...
cockpit interior would be cool, too...
different colored plastic doesn't add anything to a kit, for me...
@PHS: in 30 years, i have had 2 miscast GW metal models, 0 miscast GW plastic models, and 0 miscast FW kits, but steered clear of Finecast for myself...
for my clients, i have not had any Finecast kits that i had to sent back, but a lot of bubbles and bent bits...
from FW i've only had bent Hydra barrels, and some poor alignments...
so, yeah, i would be happy with better QC on FW and Finecast, but the plastics have always been good to me...
it is an interesting question to wonder why the legs on the bigger kits have not been broken down into more pieces for more posability...
@MWH: sure, wargaming models are more simplistic than Gundam, and even scale models kits like Tamiya, too...
i don't think that is a bad thing, as long as the wargaming model looks awesome when it goes together...
@heartserenade: i was born a non-conformist, and have a thing for threes...
it is just an unfortunate coincidence that three periods is also an ellipsis...
i handle my business emails in with proper punctuation and capitalization, but a forum is an informal place, to me, where i can just type fast in my loose style...
that is no disrespect to you guys...
exactly the opposite, in fact...
it's like we are all homeboys hanging out on the couch, playing Street Fighter and talking smack...
if the way i type makes you think that i am perpetually stoned, then i would say you read me loud and clear...
Right, from what I've heard about AoS from people who've actually PLAYED it:
* The game is simply a battle of attrition with little skill involved - lots of comments that the game lacks any depth or strategy.
* The lack of points values leads to totally unbalanced gameplay (eg you could have a Great Unclean One and eight Beasts of Nurgle versus five hundred Goblins).
* The confusing part is people seem to enjoy the battles (although not in the same way as they'd enjoy WHFB), but they say they wouldn't play it again.
* It seems like AoS was inspired by the LotR game, which never seemed to be that popular, and in which armies simply seem to be a "Hero delivery system" (and in which the Evil player may as well surrender on turn one).
* Lots of people who do not play WH seem to be keen on trying AoS.
* Lots and lots of modellers will be buying AoS for the models.
It does seem like AoS is a turn-off to existing WH fans but will make up for it in new business.
And remember, all existing WH fans seem to do is whine about the rules and the army lists. No wonder the GW binned it off. People are unfortunately having to reap what they sowed.
Swastakowey wrote:
But I do want to point one thing out... Saying things like Skaven are the best out there etc means nothing when that is up to personal opinion. My favorite ratmen in 28mm scale are these guys:
I have pet rats and I think GW rats look nothing like them. GW love hunch backs on their models (like loves love them) and I think this sets them back big time (among other reasons).
In case you dont understand one of your examples of GW being the best involved skaven, but I don't like the Cartoony look of GW chunky hunch back rats and prefer a more realistic look.
Not to drag this thing even more off-topic, but I dunno if the sausage lips and pig noses on some of the Grenadier minis are entirely realistic either. They seem a bit like old GW minis, Black Tree vermen, etc.: sculpted a cartoon dog face with comedy buck teeth.
Not to say that Seb Perbett sculpted entirely realistic rats (they're eebil mutant rat/human hybrids) but IMO he 'gets' rats. I think he did a half-decent caricature with his clanrats, just not a caricature in the way that gamers have become accustomed to. The smooth curve over the top of the head, unbroken by a pronounced brow like a dog's head; the slightly square-off profile; the round shape of the open mouth, behind the incisors, resembling the diastema of a rat skull... It's a bit like his boars for O&G: a fair bit of shouting that they didn't actually look like boars. But with their long, humped snouts and slim legs, I think they're a more insightful caricature of realboars than the squash-faced, fish-gilled, sway-backed, stumpy-legged things that gamers have accepted as 'boars'.
Seb's clanrats are what started me collecting skaven again after two abortive attempts with the old monkey-dogs. It also helps that this time, I had ebay and better-written, smaller-scale rules to help me. (There, that brought it back on topic. Almost.)
slowthar wrote:
It does seem likely to me that the primary driver for the whole WHFB reboot, beyond ailing sales figures, was the protectable-IP aspect of it.
The bean counters look at something like Skaven or Lizardmen and think, "Wow, that's so original and brilliant!" because they're just bean counters and not gamers, and they don't realize these concepts have been around for decades. Then they go out for a few games of lawyer ball, thinking they can protect this "Intellectual Property" and get their butts handed to them trying to claim copyright infringement on halberds and skulls.
A few months later, a meeting is called. The tone of the meeting is, "hey, we're really losing a lot of money here because we have all this stuff we can't protect. How can we make it protectable?" Six months down the line, the generic WHFB is blown up and now we have Space-Marine-looking good guys with super special names that can be protected in a court of law. Hooray!
At least, that's how I figure it went down, based on the company's past behaviors and having seen corporate whitewashing and bean counting ruin plenty of great things in the past.
Yup! Sticking with Skaven, I'd long heard about how ratmen existed before GW, with some intriguing references to Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser. When I looked into it, turns out one of the F&tGM stories involves an under-city populated by a bipedal, intelligent rat civilisation, rising to take over the surface world on the orders of a council of thirteen white rats. The ringing of bells also plays a part. Some coincidence that the studio came up with the same ideas (along with halberds and roman numerals) in total isolation, y'think?
Swastakowey wrote:Something to consider:
For models, the clutter of detail is a design choice not an improvement. Things in real life do not have detail covering the majority of the surface etc.
This. I've seen a lot of gamers say that minis are easy and enjoyable to paint because they're not cluttered with detail, and that some minis were frustrasting to paint because they were cluttered. (In fact, the former's one of the highest compliments I recieved for one of my own sculpts, in my view)
NoPoet wrote:
* The confusing part is people seem to enjoy the battles (although not in the same way as they'd enjoy WHFB), but they say they wouldn't play it again.
* Lots and lots of modellers will be buying AoS for the models.
Well that'll keep it afloat.
And remember, all existing WH fans seem to do is whine about the rules and the army lists. No wonder the GW binned it off. People are unfortunately having to reap what they sowed.
Yeah, 'cos killing the game is exactly what WFB fans wanted when they said 'I wish these rules and army lists would be improved', and exactly what any perfectly sane, no-market-research company would do.
A few months later, a meeting is called. The tone of the meeting is, "hey, we're really losing a lot of money here because we have all this stuff we can't protect. How can we make it protectable?" Six months down the line, the generic WHFB is blown up and now we have Space-Marine-looking good guys with super special names that can be protected in a court of law. Hooray!
The thing is though, they aren't protectable. OK other companies can't sell something directly called Hammerbloodhammers but they can sell something "to be used with Hammerbloodhammers" or just make a line of 'heroic angels' and people who are looking for alternative models will easily find them anyway.
Changing the names does absolutely nothing to protect their sales. All its does is erode the last vestiges of their old fluff, piss of veterans even more and create confusion amongst newcomers; after all everyone knows what an Orc is but what is an Orrock?
A few months later, a meeting is called. The tone of the meeting is, "hey, we're really losing a lot of money here because we have all this stuff we can't protect. How can we make it protectable?" Six months down the line, the generic WHFB is blown up and now we have Space-Marine-looking good guys with super special names that can be protected in a court of law. Hooray!
The thing is though, they aren't protectable. OK other companies can't sell something directly called Hammerbloodhammers but they can sell something "to be used with Hammerbloodhammers" or just make a line of 'heroic angels' and people who are looking for alternative models will easily find them anyway.
Changing the names does absolutely nothing to protect their sales. All its does is erode the last vestiges of their old fluff, piss of veterans even more and create confusion amongst newcomers; after all everyone knows what an Orc is but what is an Orrock?
To make matters worse, "Ogres" is used throughout the warscrolls for the OK army alongside "Ogors". I know what they mean but you think if they were so hellbent on changing names that they could have been consistent. I mean it's not like Word doesn't have a find and replace function.....it would have literally taken someone with half a brain 30 seconds to do...
A few months later, a meeting is called. The tone of the meeting is, "hey, we're really losing a lot of money here because we have all this stuff we can't protect. How can we make it protectable?" Six months down the line, the generic WHFB is blown up and now we have Space-Marine-looking good guys with super special names that can be protected in a court of law. Hooray!
The thing is though, they aren't protectable. OK other companies can't sell something directly called Hammerbloodhammers but they can sell something "to be used with Hammerbloodhammers" or just make a line of 'heroic angels' and people who are looking for alternative models will easily find them anyway.
Changing the names does absolutely nothing to protect their sales. All its does is erode the last vestiges of their old fluff, piss of veterans even more and create confusion amongst newcomers; after all everyone knows what an Orc is but what is an Orrock?
To make matters worse, "Ogres" is used throughout the warscrolls for the OK army alongside "Ogors". I know what they mean but you think if they were so hellbent on changing names that they could have been consistent. I mean it's not like Word doesn't have a find and replace function.....it would have literally taken someone with half a brain 30 seconds to do...
But that 30 seconds was all that they had allocated to write the entire game!
Talys wrote: @keezus - it's not rubbish at all. There are poses that are impossible with a small number of parts.
You are correct here. However, a large number of parts does not necessarily provide complexity! This is why your original argument doesn't hold water. A catachan on uses 6 parts to build a complete figure. The catachan is no less poseable than a multipart Space Marine despite having almost half the parts. Meanwhile, the 8 piece Space Marine Librarian is not poseable at all. Going by your complexity formula based on parts alone, the Librarian should be at least 30% more complex than the Catachan based on parts count. This is why parts count is a poor indicator of complexity and/or poseability.
Talys wrote: The single greatest advantage of multipart marines is the sheer number of combinations possible. You can match different marks of armor, different shoulders, etc. for vastly different looks. If that isn't important to you, space marines aren't being marketed to you. But obviously, since it's GW's best selling product line ever (and I would argue, the greatest reason for 40k's success), it's important to enough people to matter.[/b]
A bog standard space marine needs 11 parts to assemble irrespective of which chest plate, shoulders or head he uses. Options != complexity!!! Whether or not you add the extra stuff to him is irrelevant, as you don't need them to have a complete space marine. That little "not marketed to me" jab isn't necessary. I may not be a superfan like you but I still own a reinforced company of marines. We will have to disagree on the push fit marines. I think the ones from Black Reach are the greatest thing since sliced bread and I used them extensively to shore up my bolter squads with 2-3 in each 10 man team. There's no gap between the gun and the arm, but all the insignia are there, so my OCD need to paint under the gun isn't affected.
Talys wrote: Here are some high resolution pictures of some Gundam sprues, taken at a high enough resolution to compare with Imperial Knight. I'm not cherry picking; there wasn't much I could find, and nothing official. I did my best; most pictures are too low a resolution to clearly see.
Realize I'm beating a dead horse here - for someone not cherry picking, you could have done a tiny bit more research: The red sprue (spoilered) and the last sprue are both from a 480Y kits. That's less than $5usd. The other two are from HGAC Wing Gundam which is 1200Y kit.In the end, the detail present is highly dependent on what the model is trying to represent. Some items in 40k have lots of exposed gribbles. (Ad Mech, Necrons etc.) Some items in 40k have hardly any exposed gribbles (Tau, Eldar). Going by your metric, the Tau Sunshark would be a substandard kit compared to the Skitarii Ironstrider despite being tooled from the same process. In the end, quality wise, you're really dealing with fit and finish, and if the details present are properly rendered. With that in mind the detail on the green sprue isn't bad, it is just less prominent than the knight because the final product has a different aesthetic.
I think we're getting into silly space about parts. Yes, of course, more parts are a combination of both options and poseability. Both of which are a factor of "complexity". Things like shoulder pads are also helpful because they cover a mold line or seam. What I wouldn't do to have Dark Eldar shoulder pads.
With GW models, the CHARACTER models have a lot of parts and give you complex poses that wouldn't be possible with a small number of parts. With TROOP models, you get a lot of parts to give you options that wouldn't be possible with a smaller number of parts. For example, no shoulder pads, means... no configurable shoulder pads.
Yes, if you like snapfit models, go for it. I bought a lot of 15 snapfit marines brand new on sprue for about $1ppm (tactical squad dark angels), so I buy them too. I never said they're horrible. I said that some people don't care about configurability either on that one marine, or at all. To some gamers, whether the chestplate is an aquilla or a Mark 4 makes no difference; whether the legs are greaved or has knee pads is irrelevant. I'm not dissing those hobbyists. I'm stating a fact.
Objectively, the Black Reach snapfit marines are not close in tooling quality to a current-generation, multipart marine. Or even a Dark Vengeance snapfit. I don't have them, brand new unpainted anymore, but if you put the plastic side by side, you'd see the quality of the tooling on, say, a BA Tactical is just far superior.
Regarding the Gundam kits. They were literally the best pictures I could find of sprues. I said, if anyone had better, please share them. I've been convinced to go buy a kit -- which I will do if my hobby shop, which sells a TON of non-gaming models that I never look at, carries them (I don't really want to blindly order one online). If they have one, I'll buy the top end kit (the $150 - $300 kit; but I don't want it really much taller than 12 inches, because of display fit constraints) that they've got, and I will share 24MP photos, perfectly focused, of the sprues, side-by-side with IK sprues. Building and painting a Gundam model would be a fun project.
Anyways, cheers, have a great weekend and paint/play/collect what you like I am disengaging in the banter of this thread, because it's just eating up too much time, and I feel like it's become totally unconstructive.
A few months later, a meeting is called. The tone of the meeting is, "hey, we're really losing a lot of money here because we have all this stuff we can't protect. How can we make it protectable?" Six months down the line, the generic WHFB is blown up and now we have Space-Marine-looking good guys with super special names that can be protected in a court of law. Hooray!
The thing is though, they aren't protectable. OK other companies can't sell something directly called Hammerbloodhammers but they can sell something "to be used with Hammerbloodhammers" or just make a line of 'heroic angels' and people who are looking for alternative models will easily find them anyway.
Changing the names does absolutely nothing to protect their sales. All its does is erode the last vestiges of their old fluff, piss of veterans even more and create confusion amongst newcomers; after all everyone knows what an Orc is but what is an Orrock?
It's actually worse now because third party bits provider can actually say "compatible with Games Workshop Orug Boss kit" (or whatever the exact name is), all the while using the new fancy trademarked names, and get even better search engine results than with a generic orc/ogre boss name. And with some SEO (like promoting their work on forums and linking to their store, stuff that GW just doesn't do) they could accidentally end up being a higher result than the original GW miniature.
jah-joshua wrote:i would not complain if the IK models had more posability, even if it was just the legs...
cockpit interior would be cool, too...
different colored plastic doesn't add anything to a kit, for me...
@PHS: in 30 years, i have had 2 miscast GW metal models, 0 miscast GW plastic models, and 0 miscast FW kits, but steered clear of Finecast for myself...
for my clients, i have not had any Finecast kits that i had to sent back, but a lot of bubbles and bent bits...
from FW i've only had bent Hydra barrels, and some poor alignments...
so, yeah, i would be happy with better QC on FW and Finecast, but the plastics have always been good to me...
it is an interesting question to wonder why the legs on the bigger kits have not been broken down into more pieces for more posability...
You're really lucky then, I've gotten a good chunk of miscast metal models (Most of them were new releases at the time too, The Masque of Slaanesh on release, the Dark Eldar Archon (some heads were miscast, namely the one I bought the kit for) and the Khorne lord on Juggernaut to name a few notable miscasts)
Also, I've gotten miscast Chaos Marine sprues, Rhino doors, a partially melted Land Raider canopy (the top cover and smokestack) Heck, even had a miscast Baal Predator too, just minute examples in my more recent experience.
FW is no better either, Severely miscast Vendetta conversion kits, which took forever to clean up. The Red Scorpion honor guard and librarian needed extensive work, and the librarian was worst of all, or yeah, and a SM captain with a sword miscast, yeah, I've experienced my fair share.
I went into my FGS yesterday and the feedback was really positive about AoS from 9 out of 10 people.
I don't know what to make of it because I hardly play fantasy, my neglected goblin army hasn't seen the light of day in years, but I doubt that this is going to prove the end of the company if so many people are happy with it.
I think we're getting into silly space about parts. Yes, of course, more parts are a combination of both options and poseability. Both of which are a factor of "complexity". Things like shoulder pads are also helpful because they cover a mold line or seam. What I wouldn't do to have Dark Eldar shoulder pads.
With GW models, the CHARACTER models have a lot of parts and give you complex poses that wouldn't be possible with a small number of parts. With TROOP models, you get a lot of parts to give you options that wouldn't be possible with a smaller number of parts. For example, no shoulder pads, means... no configurable shoulder pads.
Yes, if you like snapfit models, go for it. I bought a lot of 15 snapfit marines brand new on sprue for about $1ppm (tactical squad dark angels), so I buy them too. I never said they're horrible. I said that some people don't care about configurability either on that one marine, or at all. To some gamers, whether the chestplate is an aquilla or a Mark 4 makes no difference; whether the legs are greaved or has knee pads is irrelevant. I'm not dissing those hobbyists. I'm stating a fact.
Objectively, the Black Reach snapfit marines are not close in tooling quality to a current-generation, multipart marine. Or even a Dark Vengeance snapfit. I don't have them, brand new unpainted anymore, but if you put the plastic side by side, you'd see the quality of the tooling on, say, a BA Tactical is just far superior.
Regarding the Gundam kits. They were literally the best pictures I could find of sprues. I said, if anyone had better, please share them. I've been convinced to go buy a kit -- which I will do if my hobby shop, which sells a TON of non-gaming models that I never look at, carries them (I don't really want to blindly order one online). If they have one, I'll buy the top end kit (the $150 - $300 kit; but I don't want it really much taller than 12 inches, because of display fit constraints) that they've got, and I will share 24MP photos, perfectly focused, of the sprues, side-by-side with IK sprues. Building and painting a Gundam model would be a fun project.
Anyways, cheers, have a great weekend and paint/play/collect what you like I am disengaging in the banter of this thread, because it's just eating up too much time, and I feel like it's become totally unconstructive.
@PHS: i must be lucky, indeed, as i bought all three of those metal minis that you listed on release, and they were perfect...
my Tech-Priest from yesterday had the correct 50mm base, even though a few people on here got him with a mispacked 40mm...
the only new release mini that i have had miscast was the BA Assault Sgt., who was missing half his left foot!!!
my other bad metal was a Terminator Captain with a 2mm mold shift, years before...
that guy was completely useless...
luckily, GW replaces miscasts with complete kits, leaving you with lots of bonus bits for your trouble...
as many have pointed out before, great customer service is no excuse for poor QC, but it does alleviate any hard feelings...
@jah - What do you call a miscast, anyhow? A problem on the tooling end, or a problem with the cast of the specific model during production?
I've had a models where the finished model is not as the sculptor intended (like I said, the sloppy tac markings on the DV box is one of the most obvious), but the number of production problems is really, really small. Like, count them on fingers of one hand, small.
One Stormraven had a very poor canopy -- the plastic had spiderwebs in it, almost. The store just swapped me a new model. GW told them to hang onto it and keep it for spare parts of any future problem Stormravens.
One model from a Space Hulk box came crushed -- GW FedExed me a new model (just the one).
My favorite: a Fortress of Redemption web order came to my FLGS with an horrible box (it was totally faded, obviously sun-damaged from being in a display window). It was obviously re-shrinkwrapped, because it was way too tight, and the box was somewhat crushed (and also a different material of shrinkwrap). So, my store sent a photo of it, GW sent them a new one from the UK by courier, it arrived in about 3 days, and they told them to keep the other one and do whatever the wanted with it. So my store sold me the replacement one (at my usual discount)... and gave me the first one... FOR FREE!!
Popped them both open, all the parts in both were identical
Of course, the sweet revenge is that particular kit takes a lot of paint... lol.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Jehan-reznor - I am seriously not trying to be a jerk, man. But that photo is not very good (no, neither were the ones I picked; but what can I do, those were as close up as I could find). You cannot tell what the quality of that cast is. All I can tell looking at that sprue is "there are plastic bits on a sprue that has a bunch of colors" The pretty colors are irrelevant, because we assume that as a hobby item they're gonna be painted.
The debate was: are Gundam sprues technically superior in cast and tooling to Games Workshop sprues?
This is what I was looking for -- an image with at least as much detail as this, one of MY photographs, by the way -- which show the detail on the sprue:
Or at a minimum something with this quality (the GW sprue pic):
Spoiler:
I mean, seriously, looking at the photo you picked, compared to the photos I have in this post... can you really tell which one is superior technology? If I only had your photo to go by, I'd say the amount of detail on either the Assault Marine sprue or the IK sprues are WAY, WAY higher. I mean, orders of magnitude more detail. But I chalk it up to a crappy photo that doesn't zoom into a piece of plastic, and is probably missing a whole lot of detail, so I give the Gundam model the benefit of the doubt (as several people have said otherwise).
If I get a Gundam model, I will take side-by-sides. So that you can have something like this (you need to click on it and crank the zoom to really see; the actual image is 5184x3456), and people can decide for themselves which is superior:
@Talys: when i say miscast, i am talking about the production end, not the mold making end...
the metal BA Assault Sgt. i got was missing the end of his boot, as if there was not quite enough metal poured, but the replacement was perfect...
the metal Termie Captain was from the mold not being aligned properly, so there was a 2mm offset all along the mold line on the body, but, again, the replacement was perfect...
i'm with you on the appreciation for what GW is doing with their plastics right now...
speaking about a few of the flaws on the Space Hulk and DV minis, those are tooling limitations for their plastics...
there are a few limitations visible on the DATac. Squad, like the missle launcher shoulder pad, but it is still a big improvement from the Black Reach one...
you can actually see them solving problems discovered in previous kits, which is why i keep saying does evolve and advance with their model making...
the new Termie librarian is a good example, as it has not of the flaws along the Crux pad that a couple of the SH Termies have, but they have cast the guy in a lot more parts so that all of the detail lies along the plane that works best in the steel mold...
unfortunalely, push-fit is always going to have a compromise present due to the limitation of less parts...
the more parts a model can be cut into, the more everything can lie along that nice horizontal plane that steel molds are best for...
The multiple colour plastic in the Gundam sprue is not irrelevant because you assume it is going to be painted. The point of it is you get a nicely coloured model without painting.
That would be a huge boon for everyone who doesn't like painting their GW figures and for everyone who doesn't like playing against grey armies.
It is an advanced technical feature that Bandai introduced nearly 10 years ago, which GW do not have.
It might just be my imagination but I've typically found coloured plastic kits to have inferior qualities to typical grey plastic kits. They often feel softer and/or more brittle and mould lines often don't clean up as easily.
I don't think GW kits would really benefit much from coloured plastic anyway. It makes more sense on a Gundam model where you can divide the model on the sprue in to different parts that should be different colours, but 95% of the GW models that doesn't work.
That and you can just spray the bits in almost no time anyway if that's all you want.
Not that I'm typically a GW defender, but in the context of most models, coloured plastic is largely irrelevant for most models.
The area Gundams seem to blow GW out of the water is articulation on larger kits. The IK's stance is pretty stupid and a total pain in the arse to change because GW didn't think hard enough about how to make it articulated.
I don't think it's really hard to find models that objectively have better qualities than GW's (ignoring the subjective things like density of detail). GW's strength, to me, has been the completeness of their range. 40k and WHFB have a huge array of armies with models for damned near everything and not very many holes in the ranges.
Gray is not the "natural" color of plastic so it could be a quality issue with cheap colored plastic that you dealt with. I can say that there is no difference in nature between GW plastic and the colored plastic of the mid to high range gumdam kits.
Maybe, my experience with coloured plastic is mostly in finescale models or in some of GW's coloured plastics (Space Hulk, the old Vampire Counts Skeletons come to mind).
But either way, I don't really see the point in GW bothering with coloured plastic. The only benefit might be if you want to prime and basecoat an obvious colour (say Blood Angels might be red) it'll take less coats. But then on the flip side, grey is a nice neutral colour, if you made the plastic, I dunno, blue, and the gamer decided they wanted it red, it'd take even more coats than if it was just grey to begin with.
GW cannot hold a candle to the quality of bandai kits have, yes you can post pictures of low grade gundam kits from the eighties, but if you buy a kit in the same range as the imperial knight you get full articulation metallic multicolored parts, this i just a review of an RG kit for only 2500 yen, yes it has not the same design style as GW but bandai's extruder technology is way beyond what gw is capable off.
http://gundamreviews.net/3618/models/rg-real-grade/
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Maybe, my experience with coloured plastic is mostly in finescale models or in some of GW's coloured plastics (Space Hulk, the old Vampire Counts Skeletons come to mind).
But either way, I don't really see the point in GW bothering with coloured plastic. The only benefit might be if you want to prime and basecoat an obvious colour (say Blood Angels might be red) it'll take less coats. But then on the flip side, grey is a nice neutral colour, if you made the plastic, I dunno, blue, and the gamer decided they wanted it red, it'd take even more coats than if it was just grey to begin with.
The point WAS about technology and cost, not GW doing colored plastic. But, I will give the guy who managed that derail, points for effectiveness. But the point was GW can produce kits far cheaper at better quality but choose not to.
jah-joshua wrote: @Talys: when i say miscast, i am talking about the production end, not the mold making end... the metal BA Assault Sgt. i got was missing the end of his boot, as if there was not quite enough metal poured, but the replacement was perfect... the metal Termie Captain was from the mold not being aligned properly, so there was a 2mm offset all along the mold line on the body, but, again, the replacement was perfect...
i'm with you on the appreciation for what GW is doing with their plastics right now...
speaking about a few of the flaws on the Space Hulk and DV minis, those are tooling limitations for their plastics... there are a few limitations visible on the DATac. Squad, like the missle launcher shoulder pad, but it is still a big improvement from the Black Reach one... you can actually see them solving problems discovered in previous kits, which is why i keep saying does evolve and advance with their model making... the new Termie librarian is a good example, as it has not of the flaws along the Crux pad that a couple of the SH Termies have, but they have cast the guy in a lot more parts so that all of the detail lies along the plane that works best in the steel mold... unfortunalely, push-fit is always going to have a compromise present due to the limitation of less parts... the more parts a model can be cut into, the more everything can lie along that nice horizontal plane that steel molds are best for...
cheers jah
Maybe the metal BA marine was a veteran that had his foot shot off DOH! Bolter misfire!
The snapfits have really improved over time; the crispness of the details have become better, and like you said, a lot of those shoulders are just done better, even given the same number of parts. The Sigmar snapfits are just so nice when you compare it with Dark Vengeance. Compared to Black Reach... it's miles apart.
I'm totally with you in more parts improving the overall model by leveraging the horizontal plane. This is one of the reasons I just don't get the argument of, "more parts isn't better" -- adding more parts gives the *possibility* of a better product, given the limitations of 2-part molds. Not to mention really unique poses and getting rid of undercuts.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jehan-reznor wrote: GW cannot hold a candle to the quality of bandai kits have, yes you can post pictures of low grade gundam kits from the eighties, but if you buy a kit in the same range as the imperial knight you get full articulation metallic multicolored parts, this i just a review of an RG kit for only 2500 yen, yes it has not the same design style as GW but bandai's extruder technology is way beyond what gw is capable off. http://gundamreviews.net/3618/models/rg-real-grade/
It's totally fine to think the finished model in that picture is a better model than an Imperial Knight. I don't really love the turtle-shell look of the Imperial Knight aesthetic. But that's not what we're talking about, right?
Looking at the picture on the link you provide does not show plastic tooling on a per piece basis that is technically superior to an Imperial Knight. I'm not sure what about that model is revolutionary in the pieces of plastic that comprise the model. Many of the pieces of plastic have little or no detail tooled into them, and I'm not certain where I would think, "how did they do that?", look at any sprue that I've seen so far. Look at the head, or chest, or hands and ignore the aesthetic, creativity and atristry. How complex is the HIPS tooling of one part? How close together are the etched details? How deep are the valleys and ridges, and how crisp are the details that are hard to cast?
Look at the red piece at the center of the head. It looks really simple. Look at the white piece to the left, and to the right. Look at the white piece just below the red piece. Look at the face plate, and the little red chin. The white shoulder, which looks very cool: again, is what unique about the cut of each of those pieces of polystyrene? Look at the weapons on the pictures below: which is more a more complex use of plastic and a superior job of tooling HIPS?
Try to look past the paintjobs, and compare *just the plastic* (note, all the Gundam pictures are taken from the video on your link) -
These are the questions I'd like to have answered -- does Bandai have better technology. As I've said, I would like to see plastic on the sprue of a current, PG model at high resolution.
To me, the beauty of the finished model is irrelevant, because that goes back to taste. If you think a Riptide or Wraithknight is prettier or uglier, it's prettier or uglier.
Edit: the value of metallic prepainted parts is zero, if you're going paint the whole thing anyhow. And full articulation is cool, if you want an action figure. Obviously, it's great for posability, and if you want full articulation, you will never find it in a GW model. However, It's less important -- and actually a problem -- in a game piece, where you must measure from things like the tip of the barrel. I'll be the first to agree that the IK has very limited posability; but, this is not the case for a very large number of GW models, so it's not fair to take one model and make it representative of all GW models; any more than it would be to take one bad Gundam model and make that representative.
I hate GW as much as the next guy. I wish the company would just die already so that people would stop talking about it, except maybe as a joke as a total fail gaming company.
But the weapon on that Gundam model looks slowed. And looking at all Gundam models, pretty much all the weapons look slowed. And talk about no originality, creativity or whatever you want to call it, because half the heads look the same, most the legs look the same, most the arms look the same blah blah blah. Half the models are knockoffs of each other. Yeah, there are a few models that look different, and they are UGLY.
I mean are you guys who are saying that gundam models are so awesome just blind?
If you want to talk about prepaint Japanese robots, at least pick something cool --
Spoiler:
But like, not as if I'm gonna buy one of those either, LOL.
Argh. I don't know why I came back to this thread. Now we're comparing GW models to Optimus Prime?!? Next it's gonna be Vendettas and Leman Russes versus Cobra tanks and helicopters.
I give up. You guys win I gotta stop clicking on this thread. Peace, out.
Talys wrote: Edit: the value of metallic prepainted parts is zero, if you're going paint the whole thing anyhow. And full articulation is cool, if you want an action figure. Obviously, it's great for posability, and if you want full articulation, you will never find it in a GW model. However, It's less important -- and actually a problem -- in a game piece, where you must measure from things like the tip of the barrel. I'll be the first to agree that the IK has very limited posability; but, this is not the case for a very large number of GW models, so it's not fair to take one model and make it representative of all GW models; any more than it would be to take one bad Gundam model and make that representative.
Articulation isn't just important if you want an action figure, it's important to get good poses on models without an insane amount of work cutting then reconstructing joints. Forge world manage far greater articulation in resin, I'm sure GW can manage it in plastic and they really missed the boat on the IK because the legs are weirdly posed with no in built capacity to change them, not great when you might want to buy half a dozen of them to build an army!
Obviously we can't take the IK to be representative of the whole range, we're basically just limiting ourself to talking about large robots/vehicle models since it's the only models where it's really applicable.
Beyond the articulation and price I don't really see the point in comparing Gundams to GW, they are so aesthetically different that there's very few other objective qualities you can compare. GW covers their models with ornate detail, which you may or may not like, but it makes it hard to compare to models that aren't covered in ornate detail. I personally think there's a lot of tank and aircraft models from the likes of Tamiya, Airfix, Revell, etc that are better than GW's models, but the detail comes in the form of nice neat rivets (opposed to GW giant ones) and fine details that would be too delicate for a gaming piece and your typical wargamer would find a hassle rather than a benefit, so again we are back to the subjectiveness of it all.
The knights are fine for articulation, if you look beyond the sword that can't reach targets on the ground without stooping. . I love 'em, heck I own 7, but it's like the designer got rushed for time when he got to the legs and just said, "dreadnoughts are good enough with static legs, these guys will be too."
I've just thought of a way to get around the new "IP protection" inherent in GW's current line-up.
Let's make a bunch of models that are similar but without using any AoS names or iconography, and give them different names.
So an Orrock or whatever could be, say, an... Orc? An Ogor could be... damn, this is hard... an Ogre? A Herald of Nurgle could be a Herald of Pestilence?
We'll have to create new names and new fluff, yeah, but come on, the names GW has been using are getting increasingly daft and overblown: I mean, Stormcast Eternals? Skullvane Manse? You'd spend half the game just trying to pronounce the terrain features, let alone the modes.
EDIT: And yes, this post was written in sarcasm. You CANNOT prevent people from nicking your ideas. You just have to make sure you're known to be the first. You don't have to trash your product line over it.
Talys wrote: Looking at the picture on the link you provide does not show plastic tooling on a per piece basis that is technically superior to an Imperial Knight. I'm not sure what about that model is revolutionary in the pieces of plastic that comprise the model. Many of the pieces of plastic have little or no detail tooled into them, and I'm not certain where I would think, "how did they do that?", look at any sprue that I've seen so far. Look at the head, or chest, or hands and ignore the aesthetic, creativity and atristry. How complex is the HIPS tooling of one part? How close together are the etched details? How deep are the valleys and ridges, and how crisp are the details that are hard to cast?
Considering the Eldar Wraith Knight, the kit does not show plastic tooling on a per piece basis that is technically superior to an Imperial Knight. I'm not sure what about the model is revolutionary in the pieces of plastic that comprise the model. Many of the pieces of plastic have little or no detail tooled into them, and I'm not certain where I would think, "how did they do that?", look at any sprue that I've seen so far. Look at the head, or chest, or hands and ignore the aesthetic, creativity and atristry. How complex is the HIPS tooling of one part? How close together are the etched details? How deep are the valleys and ridges, and how crisp are the details that are hard to cast?
Spoiler:
Wraithknight Sprue.
Spoiler:
Knight Gallant Sprue
Clearly, the Wraith Knight is created from inferior technology and tooling process, and its relative dearth of detail has nothing to do with the aesthetic of the subject matter.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: GW's strength, to me, has been the completeness of their range. 40k and WHFB have a huge array of armies with models for damned near everything and not very many holes in the ranges.
That "completeness," however, has come at a cost, as I would argue that GW's range has actually shrunk over the years. GW has doubled down on their core games: no more Mordheim, no more Battlefleet Gothic, no more Blood Bowl, etc. Their migration to plastic means far less variety in models. There used to be multiple SM Sergeant models, now there are none beyond what you can make from the squad boxes. There used to be multiple generic SM Librarians in power armor, now there are two (and the finecast one will probably go away eventually). Most of the old Imperial Guard range is gone (for instance, all of the Mordians but the basic squad are gone). By leaving metal behind, GW has given up their flexibility (and their huge back catalog, as I'll bet all the old molds and the masters were destroyed). Their sculptors could whomp up any cool model they could think of and sell it, and it wouldn't take much to be profitable. With plastics, they can't do something just because it might sell, they can only do what will sell. If they were to redo the whole Eldar line, would we still have the sheer variety of Farseers and Warlocks we have now?
agnosto wrote: The knights are fine for articulation, if you look beyond the sword that can't reach targets on the ground without stopping. . I love 'em, heck I own 7, but it's like the designer got rushed for time when he got to the legs and just said, "dreadnoughts are good enough with static legs, these guys will be too."
That's not the designer's fault, that's the fault of management that told him everything had to fit on X number of sprues to minimize production costs. Why make an awesome model when you can instead just make one that is "good enough"? And it isn't just the Knight that suffers from this, look at the new AdMech walkers with their legs, too.
@keezus - I completely agree with you. The Imperial Knight is a far superior and technically difficult to tool model. It's also newer and more expensive.
Anyone who has looked at sprues of the two side by side would agree that the IK has much more detail on it and cost GW more to tool.
These are the questions I'd like to have answered -- does Bandai have better technology. .
And the answer is 'Yes, they do'.
The fact that Gundam models come pre-coloured is only half of it - Some of them come pre-coloured with multiple colours on the same part.
That's something that is made possible through the use of sliding-core moulds, which also allow for detail in more than just the standard 2 dimensions that we're all used to from plastic wargaming models. It's the same technology that allows weapons to come with barrels in one piece without having to drill them out, and for detail on all sides of a model without having to break a part into multiple pieces for each facing.
That's technology that GW have only just recently started playing with, and that is unlikely to be part of their standard production any time soon... and that Gundam models have had used on them for over a decade.
You know how GW have always said that certain things are impossible to do in plastic because of undercuts? It's a lie. Those things are only impossible to do in plastic because GW are using 30-year-old technology to make their moulds.
jah-joshua wrote: @Talys: when i say miscast, i am talking about the production end, not the mold making end...
the metal BA Assault Sgt. i got was missing the end of his boot, as if there was not quite enough metal poured, but the replacement was perfect...
the metal Termie Captain was from the mold not being aligned properly, so there was a 2mm offset all along the mold line on the body, but, again, the replacement was perfect...
i'm with you on the appreciation for what GW is doing with their plastics right now...
speaking about a few of the flaws on the Space Hulk and DV minis, those are tooling limitations for their plastics...
there are a few limitations visible on the DATac. Squad, like the missle launcher shoulder pad, but it is still a big improvement from the Black Reach one...
you can actually see them solving problems discovered in previous kits, which is why i keep saying does evolve and advance with their model making...
the new Termie librarian is a good example, as it has not of the flaws along the Crux pad that a couple of the SH Termies have, but they have cast the guy in a lot more parts so that all of the detail lies along the plane that works best in the steel mold...
unfortunalely, push-fit is always going to have a compromise present due to the limitation of less parts...
the more parts a model can be cut into, the more everything can lie along that nice horizontal plane that steel molds are best for...
cheers
jah
Maybe the metal BA marine was a veteran that had his foot shot off DOH! Bolter misfire!
The snapfits have really improved over time; the crispness of the details have become better, and like you said, a lot of those shoulders are just done better, even given the same number of parts. The Sigmar snapfits are just so nice when you compare it with Dark Vengeance. Compared to Black Reach... it's miles apart.
I'm totally with you in more parts improving the overall model by leveraging the horizontal plane. This is one of the reasons I just don't get the argument of, "more parts isn't better" -- adding more parts gives the *possibility* of a better product, given the limitations of 2-part molds. Not to mention really unique poses and getting rid of undercuts.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jehan-reznor wrote: GW cannot hold a candle to the quality of bandai kits have, yes you can post pictures of low grade gundam kits from the eighties, but if you buy a kit in the same range as the imperial knight you get full articulation metallic multicolored parts, this i just a review of an RG kit for only 2500 yen, yes it has not the same design style as GW but bandai's extruder technology is way beyond what gw is capable off.
http://gundamreviews.net/3618/models/rg-real-grade/
It's totally fine to think the finished model in that picture is a better model than an Imperial Knight. I don't really love the turtle-shell look of the Imperial Knight aesthetic. But that's not what we're talking about, right?
Looking at the picture on the link you provide does not show plastic tooling on a per piece basis that is technically superior to an Imperial Knight. I'm not sure what about that model is revolutionary in the pieces of plastic that comprise the model. Many of the pieces of plastic have little or no detail tooled into them, and I'm not certain where I would think, "how did they do that?", look at any sprue that I've seen so far. Look at the head, or chest, or hands and ignore the aesthetic, creativity and atristry. How complex is the HIPS tooling of one part? How close together are the etched details? How deep are the valleys and ridges, and how crisp are the details that are hard to cast?
Look at the red piece at the center of the head. It looks really simple. Look at the white piece to the left, and to the right. Look at the white piece just below the red piece. Look at the face plate, and the little red chin. The white shoulder, which looks very cool: again, is what unique about the cut of each of those pieces of polystyrene? Look at the weapons on the pictures below: which is more a more complex use of plastic and a superior job of tooling HIPS?
Try to look past the paintjobs, and compare *just the plastic* (note, all the Gundam pictures are taken from the video on your link) -
These are the questions I'd like to have answered -- does Bandai have better technology. ...
i sure hope not...
i am really excited to see some new-look Orcs and Slayers...
i am a fan of evolution and change...
it doesn't kill my enjoyment of the old stuff, but adds new, different styles to enjoy...
@Killcrazy: i agree...
i would not try to argue that GW has better technology that Bandai...
the only question that matters to me, is what does the buyer prefer to spend his money on???
if someone wants a Gundam, then no GW kit is going to scratch that itch, and vice versa...
this is why i only compare GW to GW...
if one looks at the new kits (2013 Tac. Squad, 2015 Assault and Dev, Squads), they have better detailing, less compromise in tooling, and more options on the sprues than their predecessors...
the DV set was a clear improvement over the AoBR push-fits...
the 2009 SH set were the most amazingly detailed and posed push-fit Termies we have seen from GW...
AoS has taken the push-fit minis another notch up from the DV starter set...
as long as GW continues to push their own technology, and visibly improve their models with each new iteration, then they will continue to get my money...
that only leaves the question of whether or not there will come a point where they will finally price even me out of collecting their minis...
These are the questions I'd like to have answered -- does Bandai have better technology. .
And the answer is 'Yes, they do'.
The fact that Gundam models come pre-coloured is only half of it - Some of them come pre-coloured with multiple colours on the same part.
That's something that is made possible through the use of sliding-core moulds, which also allow for detail in more than just the standard 2 dimensions that we're all used to from plastic wargaming models. It's the same technology that allows weapons to come with barrels in one piece without having to drill them out, and for detail on all sides of a model without having to break a part into multiple pieces for each facing.
That's technology that GW have only just recently started playing with, and that is unlikely to be part of their standard production any time soon... and that Gundam models have had used on them for over a decade.
You know how GW have always said that certain things are impossible to do in plastic because of undercuts? It's a lie. Those things are only impossible to do in plastic because GW are using 30-year-old technology to make their moulds.
Like I said, I'm not making a judgment, either way. I'm keeping an open mind, and I'll actually buy a model, and examine it to judge for myself (and share photos so that others can see). Nobody has provided a decent picture of a sprue or a part like what you've described, and what's on the internet doesn't look exciting at all.
Since I'm painting the model, colored plastic is of no value. Arguably, it's of NEGATIVE value, because colored airbrush primer isn't opaque with some colors (like red), and red on yellow or red on blue or red on red come out differently (plus priming the over the same color, like red on red, is awful, since you can't tell what you've missed). The coolest thing in the pictured sprues describing what you're saying is a clear plastic piece beside a colored sprue. But seriously, how important is that to me? Why would I care if it came on separate sprue?
I have not seen a sprue with a single piece rifle with the barrel drilled out. That would excite me!
To extrapolate that: if a model came with hollowed out sections and no joined pieces (in other words, no front/back, left/right assembles, and every pieces separate except where articulation requires it to be) -- my mind would be blown away. In fact, my mind would be blown away with a monopose Imperial Knight that was single pose, and "no assembly required"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Beyond the articulation and price I don't really see the point in comparing Gundams to GW, they are so aesthetically different that there's very few other objective qualities you can compare. GW covers their models with ornate detail, which you may or may not like, but it makes it hard to compare to models that aren't covered in ornate detail. I personally think there's a lot of tank and aircraft models from the likes of Tamiya, Airfix, Revell, etc that are better than GW's models, but the detail comes in the form of nice neat rivets (opposed to GW giant ones) and fine details that would be too delicate for a gaming piece and your typical wargamer would find a hassle rather than a benefit, so again we are back to the subjectiveness of it all.
It all originally started because of a conversation about Bandai's manufacturing process being superior, and "why doesn't GW do that?". Which I think is not an unreasonable question, and which I think is not yet answered to my satisfaction, because nobody seems to have a picture of one of these beautifully cast pieces of plastic (still on sprue) that display amazing technology. Which is no-one's fault, because people can't be expected to keep unassembled product hanging around, waiting to photograph.
But what you're saying was my point originally, to be frank: there is no point in comparing Gundam robots to GW models, because the aesthetics are really different, and they (mostly) serve two non-overlapping markets. They don't compete for the same dollars (mostly), so the relative prices aren't even relevant. For the same reason that an Optimus Prime, however awesome, shouldn't be compared with a Gundam or a Riptide, even though they're all robots.
It's like when I came back from Asia and was trying to tell people that American cell phones were way behind Asia, technologically speaking, but some wouldn't hear it because they loved their BlackBerry...until I pulled out my DoCoMo cellphone that I could watch tv on and was a true smart phone before Apple popularized the term. Some people don't want to believe that a company that they have invested a great deal of emotion into has fallen behind.
So, Agnosto.. please explain how these parts are technically superior to GW sprues, since you have one.
I don't see it, personally. As I was saying, anything prepainted is either of zero or negative value, since it just makes prepping harder.
I don't see cool stuff like what insaniak was saying, where a single piece gun barrel cast across a horizontal plane is hollow inside, or a piece which doesn't have undercuts, or detail that is superior to GW's.
I'm not being emotional about it; I just want someone to show me something technically superior to the chainsword or carapace plate (the one with the AdMech symbol) in this -
Spoiler:
Call me blind, but all I see are is are low density sprues (where the parts are all spread out really inefficiently, like a 2005 GW kit), and colored pieces that could be for any model. I don't see them being inferior; neither do I see anything super duper awesome or crossing some technological hurdle.
Talys wrote: So, Agnosto.. please explain how these parts are technically superior to GW sprues, since you have one.
I don't see it, personally. As I was saying, anything prepainted is either of zero or negative value, since it just makes prepping harder.
I don't see cool stuff like what insaniak was saying, where a single piece gun barrel cast across a horizontal plane is hollow inside, or a piece which doesn't have undercuts, or detail that is superior to GW's.
I'm not being emotional about it; I just want someone to show me something technically superior to the chainsword or carapace plate (the one with the AdMech symbol) in this -
Spoiler:
Call me blind, but all I see are is are low density sprues (where the parts are all spread out really inefficiently, like a 2005 GW kit), and colored pieces that could be for any model. I don't see them being inferior; neither do I see anything super duper awesome or crossing some technological hurdle.
Moving goalposts. You wanted an example of multiple colors on the same part, I googled it for you and showed it. I don't own the kit and generally don't have unbuilt models of any stripe just lying about to satisfy your curiosity, which is probably the case for most people on here. I buy as I build, I find that I accumulate less clutter that way. Personally, I don't buy Gundam models because I don't find them aesthetically appealing; that doesn't mean that I am unable to recognize that they are superior to GW models in some ways. Just like GW models are superior, in my eye, in other ways. I know that they don't meet the, so many skulls per square mm, of GW models but that doesn't mean that they are in any way, shape or form inferior.
What Bandai has done is created a way to increase their sales volume with pre-colored models by attracting non-modelers who want a cool model for a game or other reason but don't have the desire/time/whatever to spend countless hours painting. There's a lesson there for GW. Precolored, snapfit marines (for example) would probably sale a great deal more than gray models that take more time to assemble and paint. By creating both, they could broaden their market reach and increase the attractiveness of their kits for non-modellers to buy and get into their games.
No no, agnosto. I did not say that I wanted to see multicolored parts at all. Look back and read my posts: I have never said that I wanted to see multiple colors on anything. Someone else said that; I said that was a NEGATIVE. It messes you up when you prime it with airbrush stuff (just try priming a blue part with red primer, and a red part with red primer, and look at how it turns out... ick... I will take grey plastic for modelling purposes any day of the week).
In fact, if you scroll back a page or so, I gave photos of sprues that were colored and that had multiple colors on the same sprue (but not the same part, I don't think... I wasn't paying attention to that, as I didn't care). They were even of high enough resolution to look at the quality of the cut plastic (to which the objection was, "these are cheap kits" -- well, ok, but there are no high res images I could find of expensive sprues...).
I want to see actual plastic parts that are more complex, or as Insaniak put it, capable of dealing with undercuts in a different way. This would (truly) excite me. Like a bolter I didn't have to drill out, or fill the top and bottom of? HELL YA.
Perhaps something that was attractive to non-modellers would be good for GW. But that really IS moving goalposts. This was about technological capability for making superior models (which I'm interested in), not about other markets (which I'm not).
I suppose that I'm in a 3rd group and mainly indifferent about them. I find discussion of their financials sometimes interesting because I was formerly a stockholder; I like some of their models while sometimes shaking my head at the design choices of others (the new chaos model in AoS with skulls literally oozing out of its skin is a bit OTT).
I own a large number of GW kits, just as I do from other manufacturers; I'm a poor painter but I enjoy building models and have since I was a small child with model cars, tanks, etc.
GW could die tomorrow, the factory could go up in flames and I wouldn't care just as it wouldn't phase me if they became insanely, broadly popular and their stock jumped through the roof (if only that I might kick myself for selling).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Talys wrote: No no, agnosto. I did not say that I wanted to see multicolored parts at all. Look back and read my posts: I have never said that I wanted to see multiple colors on anything. Someone else said that; I said that was a NEGATIVE. It messes you up when you prime it with airbrush stuff.
I want to see actual plastic parts that are more complex, or as Insaniak put it, capable of dealing with undercuts in a different way. This would (truly) excite me. Like a bolter I didn't have to drill out, or fill the top and bottom of? HELL YA.
You asked to see sprues with parts that multiple colors on the same part and/or the gun barrels without need for drilling thing. I didn't care enough to find the gun barrel thing but did find the multiple colors after looking at about 20 pics.
I know you like to take things very personally but if we're going to have a subjective conversation, you're going to have to attempt to remove your personal preferences from the discussion. Besides which, I fail to see how pre-colored plastic, that doesn't create any raised surfaces, stops you from priming a model and treating it like you would any other "gray" model but then I don't use airbrushes so maybe it's just something to do with that. Meh.
I'm sorry, but I did not say that, I wanted to see multicolored parts, Agnosto. I will eat my words and gift you a nice model if I said that anywhere. 2 colors on the same part never even came up until Insaniak brought it up in the quoted section below.
These are the questions I'd like to have answered -- does Bandai have better technology. .
And the answer is 'Yes, they do'.
The fact that Gundam models come pre-coloured is only half of it - Some of them come pre-coloured with multiple colours on the same part.
That's something that is made possible through the use of sliding-core moulds, which also allow for detail in more than just the standard 2 dimensions that we're all used to from plastic wargaming models. It's the same technology that allows weapons to come with barrels in one piece without having to drill them out, and for detail on all sides of a model without having to break a part into multiple pieces for each facing.
That's technology that GW have only just recently started playing with, and that is unlikely to be part of their standard production any time soon... and that Gundam models have had used on them for over a decade.
You know how GW have always said that certain things are impossible to do in plastic because of undercuts? It's a lie. Those things are only impossible to do in plastic because GW are using 30-year-old technology to make their moulds.
Like I said, I'm not making a judgment, either way. I'm keeping an open mind, and I'll actually buy a model, and examine it to judge for myself (and share photos so that others can see). Nobody has provided a decent picture of a sprue or a part like what you've described, and what's on the internet doesn't look exciting at all.
Since I'm painting the model, colored plastic is of no value. Arguably, it's of NEGATIVE value, because colored airbrush primer isn't opaque with some colors (like red), and red on yellow or red on blue or red on red come out differently (plus priming the over the same color, like red on red, is awful, since you can't tell what you've missed). The coolest thing in the pictured sprues describing what you're saying is a clear plastic piece beside a colored sprue. But seriously, how important is that to me? Why would I care if it came on separate sprue?
I have not seen a sprue with a single piece rifle with the barrel drilled out. That would excite me!
To extrapolate that: if a model came with hollowed out sections and no joined pieces (in other words, no front/back, left/right assembles, and every pieces separate except where articulation requires it to be) -- my mind would be blown away. In fact, my mind would be blown away with a monopose Imperial Knight that was single pose, and "no assembly required"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
agnosto wrote: I know you like to take things very personally but if we're going to have a subjective conversation, you're going to have to attempt to remove your personal preferences from the discussion. Besides which, I fail to see how pre-colored plastic, that doesn't create any raised surfaces, stops you from priming a model and treating it like you would any other "gray" model but then I don't use airbrushes so maybe it's just something to do with that. Meh.
I'm not trying to be emotional about this, agnosto. I just want to see some of the awesome technology that people keep saying is out there, but I haven't seen a sprue that demonstrates it. I am not saying it doesn't exist. People just keep talking about it, but with not a demonstrable photo. To be clear: my goal would be to say, "wow, IK would be so much cooler if it had THIS." Not, "IK is better than that".
Colored Vallejo airbrush primer is not opaque (unlike from a rattle can). Especially the colors like red (and you see I've painted a zillion blood angels, so red matters to me...). Therefore, red primer on blue plastic will leave you with a different color than red primer on yellow plastic, as a color to start working from, either with an airbrush with regular paint or a paintbrush with regular paint. I'm sure you can see the objections from there without me spelling it out, but it's essentially like priming half your model one color, the other half another, and saying, "have fun painting it".
Talys wrote: I'm sorry, but I did not say that, I wanted to see multicolored parts, Agnosto. I will eat my words and gift you a nice model if I said that anywhere. 2 colors on the same part never even came up until Insaniak brought it up in the quoted section below.
These are the questions I'd like to have answered -- does Bandai have better technology. .
And the answer is 'Yes, they do'.
The fact that Gundam models come pre-coloured is only half of it - Some of them come pre-coloured with multiple colours on the same part.
That's something that is made possible through the use of sliding-core moulds, which also allow for detail in more than just the standard 2 dimensions that we're all used to from plastic wargaming models. It's the same technology that allows weapons to come with barrels in one piece without having to drill them out, and for detail on all sides of a model without having to break a part into multiple pieces for each facing.
That's technology that GW have only just recently started playing with, and that is unlikely to be part of their standard production any time soon... and that Gundam models have had used on them for over a decade.
You know how GW have always said that certain things are impossible to do in plastic because of undercuts? It's a lie. Those things are only impossible to do in plastic because GW are using 30-year-old technology to make their moulds.
Like I said, I'm not making a judgment, either way. I'm keeping an open mind, and I'll actually buy a model, and examine it to judge for myself (and share photos so that others can see). Nobody has provided a decent picture of a sprue or a part like what you've described, and what's on the internet doesn't look exciting at all.
Since I'm painting the model, colored plastic is of no value. Arguably, it's of NEGATIVE value, because colored airbrush primer isn't opaque with some colors (like red), and red on yellow or red on blue or red on red come out differently (plus priming the over the same color, like red on red, is awful, since you can't tell what you've missed). The coolest thing in the pictured sprues describing what you're saying is a clear plastic piece beside a colored sprue. But seriously, how important is that to me? Why would I care if it came on separate sprue?
I have not seen a sprue with a single piece rifle with the barrel drilled out. That would excite me!
To extrapolate that: if a model came with hollowed out sections and no joined pieces (in other words, no front/back, left/right assembles, and every pieces separate except where articulation requires it to be) -- my mind would be blown away. In fact, my mind would be blown away with a monopose Imperial Knight that was single pose, and "no assembly required"
I could have sworn you asked to see sprue pics of the variety that Insaniak was talking about but it doesn't appear to be there now. Whatever, as I said, I really don't care. I could tell you that I've seen what Insaniak is talking about but that's not proof and a quick, cursory look on the interwebs just shows top-down pics of sprues so there's no proof there either as people don't normally take end-on pics of sprues.
I'll just say, believe what you want, at the end of the day it doesn't affect me and we can both go on our merry way.
Since I'm painting the model, colored plastic is of no value.
Whether or not it is of value to you has no bearing on whether or not it is more advanced technology.
A nuclear submarine is more advanced technology than my bicycle. The fact that I don't want to ride to work in a nuclear submarine doesnt change that fact.
But, again , the colours aren't the whole story. It's the technology that is involved in doing that multi coloured casting that is the point. It allows you to create detail that is impossible in conventional moulds due to allowing the plastic to be injected on multiple stages.
Talys, you asked for sprues that showed superior tech.
When someone shows you a sprue which features multiple colours on the same sprue, including, it appears, multiple colours on the same piece, something GW cannot do by all accounts, it isn't good enough?
agnosto wrote: I'll just say, believe what you want, at the end of the day it doesn't affect me and we can both go on our merry way.
I'm not trying to get into a forum knife-fight, buddy I just don't like being told repeatedly that I said something that I didn't. For the record, I got a PM from someone with some pretty cool finished Gundam stuff, which is why I'm going to try to buy one and fiddle with it -- unfortunately, the only store that likely caries it is pretty far from me, so won't be til next week that I can check it out.
Again, if you do both, simple push-fit pre-colored models for casual, non-modellers, and more complex models for "advanced" hobbyists, you broaden your market out-reach. Sure there's an initial investment in the equipment but don't pay dividends for one half and that's a non-issue.
agnosto wrote: I'll just say, believe what you want, at the end of the day it doesn't affect me and we can both go on our merry way.
I'm not trying to get into a forum knife-fight, buddy I just don't like being told repeatedly that I said something that I didn't. For the record, I got a PM from someone with some pretty cool finished Gundam stuff, which is why I'm going to try to buy one and fiddle with it -- unfortunately, the only store that likely caries it is pretty far from me, so won't be til next week that I can check it out.
Not my intention either. Like I said, I don't have a dog in the fight; apologies if I misinterpreted something.
hobbylink Japan has some great stuff (but quite a bit often goes out of stock).
4 Mounted, or 6 Foot miniatures from Gripping Beast: £12
That means that 40 mounted or 60 foot comes to £120
And, Fantasy Miniatures from other, similar companies are roughly an equivalent price (Reaper, Iron Wind, Thunderbolt Mountain, etc.).
I got roughly 150 Thunderbolt Mountain elves, and an equivalent number of Heavy Goblin Warriors and Archers for around $750. That was a little less than $3/figure, for what are some of the best sculpted fantasy miniatures ever produced.
Now, I understand that there is a certain aesthetic to GW's products, to which people are attracted.
But they are really being taken advantage of considering the prices being charged for these products.
GW are not Meirce, or one of the other companies who do legitimately high-end miniatures.
Most of the miniatures GW makes are rather clumsy and over-the-top in their detailing and sculpting when compared to even Reaper.
But, I suppose that Stockholm Syndrome is pretty strong when dealing with people who are basically held hostage by a company like GW.
MB
From the websites:
GW Elfin spearmen are $35 for 16 plastic multipart
GW has done colored plastics to appeal to the non-painting boardgame crowd...
2009 Space Hulk being the most recent example...
what they have not done is mix colors on the same sprue...
that looks like some hi-tech wizardry!!!
the thing is, Kirby has shown quite clearly that he doesn't want to broaden appeal to encompass the boardgamers, and non-modelers...
he does not want to lower prices to make the product appeal to a wider audience...
he wants the name and product to have a cache, rather than mass-appeal...
i know that pisses a lot of people off, but that is his schtick...
when he retires, maybe the company philosophy will shift back to the way things were when scratch building was encouraged, WFB armies had smaller units, and kid with a couple of bob in his pocket could buy a blister...
...and maybe the moon is made of cheese...
seriously, times change...
the writing has been on the wall for a long time...
GW is a company that wants you to give them your money on their terms, no question about it...
if anyone wants to abandon ship, and head over to the S.S. Mantic, or jump on the Warmahordes train, i think it is awesome that the option is there...
i would rather see everyone happily painting and gaming, than having internet knife fights, or starting threads about how they would like to see GW die, but people do love their drama...
No, why would I hope that? No matter how poor their rules get or how overpriced their product becomes (both only opinion, of course) if either or both of those factors become too much for me, I would simply stop buying and playing and sell off my armies. No point in hoping for hundreds of people (some of whom I quite like on a personal level) to lose their jobs and livelihood...
Lord Corellia wrote: No, why would I hope that? No matter how poor their rules get or how overpriced their product becomes (both only opinion, of course) if either or both of those factors become too much for me, I would simply stop buying and playing and sell off my armies. No point in hoping for hundreds of people (some of whom I quite like on a personal level) to lose their jobs and livelihood...
Thing is, as rough as losing your job is, the UK jobs market is very healthy right now. Just last week the news had interviews with both employers and recruitment agencies all saying that getting hold of good people is getting harder and harder, right across the spectrum of skills.
So, making the basic assumption that most people are in their position on merit *cough*AlanMerret*cough* then now wouldn't be a terrible time for it to happen.
You've also got to think that maybe, should a company go down as a result of a series of bad decisions, then there's a percentage of the employees that probably deserve to lose their jobs.
Lord Corellia wrote: No, why would I hope that? No matter how poor their rules get or how overpriced their product becomes (both only opinion, of course) if either or both of those factors become too much for me, I would simply stop buying and playing and sell off my armies. No point in hoping for hundreds of people (some of whom I quite like on a personal level) to lose their jobs and livelihood...
Thing is, as rough as losing your job is, the UK jobs market is very healthy right now. Just last week the news had interviews with both employers and recruitment agencies all saying that getting hold of good people is getting harder and harder, right across the spectrum of skills.
So, making the basic assumption that most people are in their position on merit *cough*AlanMerret*cough* then now wouldn't be a terrible time for it to happen.
You've also got to think that maybe, should a company go down as a result of a series of bad decisions, then there's a percentage of the employees that probably deserve to lose their jobs.
I have to go with Lord Corellia on this one. It's all well and easy to say just go find a new job. Not so easy to be in the middle of sweating out finding a job with comparable wages and benefits when you have a family and mortgage to worry about, so I will be in the camp that instead of wishing GW goes out of business, that they can use AoS to rekindle their fantasy side of the house and continuously improve their games as time goes on.
The fact is if GW go out of business, they'll have nowhere to look but at themselves. While I'd have every sympathy for all the lower ranking staff, that's mitigated by my feeling that a large number of senior staff would have had it coming.
Azreal13 wrote: All well and easy? I've fething done it mate!
I know of what I speak.
The fact is if GW go out of business, they'll have nowhere to look but at themselves. While I'd have every sympathy for all the lower ranking staff, that's mitigated by my feeling that a large number of senior staff would have had it coming.
Congratulations, then. I have seen several people lose their homes and in some cases, their marriages after losing their jobs. My thoughts, I think parallel yours about company officers who in their arrogance or greed, run a company under. The trouble is, though, that kind usually has their exit strategy well planned and barely feel the sting, if at all.
Well, I've no intention of taking the thread off on another pointless tangent but suffice to say I'd suggest you walk a mile in my shoes before you start citing examples of other people that you know who have lost a great deal at me due to circumstances outside of their control.
Azreal13 wrote: Well, I've no intention of taking the thread off on another pointless tangent but suffice to say I'd suggest you walk a mile in my shoes before you start citing examples of other people that you know who have lost a great deal at me due to circumstances outside of their control.
I'm happy for your success, though, and was agreeing with some of your statement. No need to be pissed at nothing.
Gundam* Seriously, please attempt to spell the subject matter correctly when addressing it.
You're fine to have opinions, but you came in hot declaring it as a fact. Which, the facts don't lie, GW just aren't as creative as they used to be, a lot of their *older* sculpts, are more creative than the crap we have now. If you want proof, look at the Chaos Range.
Look at the evolution of the Pink/Blue horrors of Tzeentch, we had these awesome, freaky and amorphous sculpts for 3rd-4th edition 40K, you even had the Blue horrors trying to rip and tear their way out from inside a Pink Horror. It was truly the stuff of nightmares which is EXACTLY what Tzeentch Daemons *should* be. Now, we have pink monkeys with feathers and ork teeth and beaks... Really? We went from Gothic Horror, to mash up comedy.
The Daemon Prince went from ascended Prince to Saturday morning Cartoon Villain with a slim hourglass figure. Ugh...
Chaos Raptors - went from heavy metal, carrion bird (vulture) type Marines to cartoony, jagged, funky looking models... Kinda turned me off of buying them.
Possessed - Everyone knows the issues with the possessed kit, the fact of only being able to assemble two good looking models is absurd.
Daemonettes - Not the image of deadly beauty they used to be. Especially once they gave them crabclaws... Ugh... I want my rending talons back! Daemonettes were supposed to be elegant beautiful women with daemonic appendages, now they look like women/turkey hermaphrodites. Again, a joke
About the only positive change in the Chaos range in the past 7-8 years has been the Plastic Bloodletters, which actually look like fething daemons! Khorne seems to luck out on stuff like that.
Hailing them as being "a Creative engine" is entirely your opinion, one not popular and doesn't add to the discussion at all.
Actually, the daemonettes everyone loves by Juan Diaz are third generation. The first and second had crab claws and were hideous. They eventually became elegant "beauty". But they started out hideous. GW went back to their roots on this one. The bloodletters are back to their roots as well; just slightly frailer. And the old pink and blue horrors were also more like the current bodies (without beaks and orc mouths). So...yeah. Current chaos lesser daemons are similar to their oldest forms. They just show no similarities to the last metal iteration (which I agree was hands down the best iteration with the exception of Plaguebearers).
Why all the ridiculous hate on these threads? If you don't like it don't buy it. My wife is building my starter set as I write (yes I'm lucky!). These are the nicest models I've ever seen! Also I'm working with people on here to tweak the rules (kind of fun playing game designer!) just a little bit. I've got a buddy coming over next week to play test with me. So let's see , for 90.00 I got a box of the best models I've ever seen. Having fun working with people here on some rules and points. Getting in games with buddies with new models. For me AOS has been a lot of fun and hope to keep it coming!
Disclaimer: Jervis Johnson and the GW design team are brain dead . However they left a decent framework to build on. TBH after what they've done to 40K I'd rather they do the fluff, models and basic rules. Then leave the rest to the gaming community.
Haldir wrote: Why all the ridiculous hate on these threads? If you don't like it don't buy it..
Firstly - not hate.
Secondly - "if you don't like it don't buy it" is analogous as an argument as "why are you arguing against gun control, you've not been shot" or "why are you advocating for greater environmental controls, your village hasn't been washed away by a tsunami!"
It is not necessary to experience something to wish to discuss it, have an opinion on it or recognise the issues.
Azreal13 wrote: Well, I've no intention of taking the thread off on another pointless tangent but suffice to say I'd suggest you walk a mile in my shoes before you start citing examples of other people that you know who have lost a great deal at me due to circumstances outside of their control.
I'm happy for your success, though, and was agreeing with some of your statement. No need to be pissed at nothing.
What success? I'm still dealing with elements of the fallout.
Like I say, don't make assumptions, I'm not pissed but I'm not going to accept second hand anecdotes from someone on a subject I've experienced myself firsthand. I knew exactly what I was saying, and stand by it.
Gentlemen , something is wrong here if we're mentioning gun control , environmental issues and toy soldiers...... I didn't mean to offend anyone , but I do feel the anti GW rankings are a bit overboard. But hey everyone is entitled to express themselves and how they feel. No offense was meant. But hey if you are unhappy why are you venting here ? I sent a whole page email to GW lambasting how in a matter of days people here can design a better points system than their whole staff! Everyone unhappy should do the same!
Talys, I'm going to be digging out my RG Exia kit tonight just to take pictures for you, I will be posting them later to show some of the better detail on the kit. And yes, it is good. I'll also be mentioning the hands on the models, were molded as two parts, but the fingers are wonderful and articulate.
I'm happy for your success, though, and was agreeing with some of your statement. No need to be pissed at nothing.
"What success? I'm still dealing with elements of the fallout.
Like I say, don't make assumptions, I'm not pissed but I'm not going to accept second hand anecdotes from someone on a subject I've experienced myself firsthand. I knew exactly what I was saying, and stand by it."
To tell the truth, I've been through that fire myself, so don't assume I don't know what I'm talking about. Why you would wish this on someone else knowing what it is like. Wow.
Haldir wrote: Yes agreed , but expressing your displeasure could be better served by emailing. GW directly. The more emails they receive the better. Right?
Us players in NZ and AUS organized a mailer late last year. We all got the same automated reply from GW saying the pricing is good/necessary for the company.
Fast forward to now and they are trying to sell us a dice shaker for 88 dollars.
There was also a pretty huge GW change petition not long after that got heaps of signatures.
Now they are trying to sell me 3 inches of metal for 65 dollars and trying to sell me a half assed game with 25 dollar basic sigmarines.
I would love it if GW listened to any of their customers, but I hear they pride themselves in not listening.
In short, tried your way and failed. Anyway complaining on the internet is how our club stopped GW games and played/purchased worthwhile games. So far more good has come from the complainers than talking to GW so why not continue that instead.
Haldir wrote: Yes agreed , but expressing your displeasure could be better served by emailing. GW directly. The more emails they receive the better. Right?
Us players in NZ and AUS organized a mailer late last year. We all got the same automated reply from GW saying the pricing is good/necessary for the company.
Fast forward to now and they are trying to sell us a dice shaker for 88 dollars.
There was also a pretty huge GW change petition not long after that got heaps of signatures.
Now they are trying to sell me 3 inches of metal for 65 dollars and trying to sell me a half assed game with 25 dollar basic sigmarines.
I would love it if GW listened to any of their customers, but I hear they pride themselves in not listening.
In short, tried your way and failed. Anyway complaining on the internet is how our club stopped GW games and played/purchased worthwhile games. So far more good has come from the complainers than talking to GW so why not continue that instead.
Haldir wrote: Yes agreed , but expressing your displeasure could be better served by emailing. GW directly. The more emails they receive the better. Right?
Us players in NZ and AUS organized a mailer late last year. We all got the same automated reply from GW saying the pricing is good/necessary for the company.
Fast forward to now and they are trying to sell us a dice shaker for 88 dollars.
There was also a pretty huge GW change petition not long after that got heaps of signatures.
Now they are trying to sell me 3 inches of metal for 65 dollars and trying to sell me a half assed game with 25 dollar basic sigmarines.
I would love it if GW listened to any of their customers, but I hear they pride themselves in not listening.
In short, tried your way and failed. Anyway complaining on the internet is how our club stopped GW games and played/purchased worthwhile games. So far more good has come from the complainers than talking to GW so why not continue that instead.
Suck, but oh well.
What did the reply say?
Good Morning
Many thanks for your email regarding to Australian prices.
Our prices are set for Australia at the level that ensures we can support our Australian business, including all our Hobby Centres and their staff which recruit and support many happy Hobbyists across the country. If we sold our products at UK prices to Australian customers, we would unfortunately be unable to sustain our operation there. We work hard to protect our employees jobs, the success of our business, and ultimately the health of the Hobby in every country in which we operate.
While I understand that you may be unhappy with our decision, I hope the explanation above is helpful regarding our prices.
Took me a while to find it, but everyone got that reply.
Makes me wonder why they don't just sell from the UK instead. Not many people here seem to order from GW at all but instead go to discounters from the USA or recasts.
Funny, at the bottom of the email they had an add for stronghold assault, the short lived 6th edition book haha.
Swastakowey wrote:Makes me wonder why they don't just sell from the UK instead. Not many people here seem to order from GW at all but instead go to discounters from the USA or recasts.
Funny, at the bottom of the email they had an add for stronghold assault, the short lived 6th edition book haha.
Yeah, I have wondered the same thing! I'm happy to take them at their word (the alternative being Kirby got kicked by a kangaroo), but just closing Australian operations and going mail order would seem the intelligent thing to do.
On the bright side Stronghold Assault is still current
Swastakowey wrote:Fast forward to now and they are trying to sell us a dice shaker for 88 dollars.
The shaker is pretty crazy priced everywhere. They are targeted at the same folks that buy LE books.... generous girlfriends and boyfriends!
Swastakowey wrote:Makes me wonder why they don't just sell from the UK instead. Not many people here seem to order from GW at all but instead go to discounters from the USA or recasts.
Funny, at the bottom of the email they had an add for stronghold assault, the short lived 6th edition book haha.
Yeah, I have wondered the same thing! I'm happy to take them at their word (the alternative being Kirby got kicked by a kangaroo), but just closing Australian operations and going mail order would seem the intelligent thing to do.
On the bright side Stronghold Assault is still current
Swastakowey wrote:Fast forward to now and they are trying to sell us a dice shaker for 88 dollars.
The shaker is pretty crazy priced everywhere. They are targeted at the same folks that buy LE books.... generous girlfriends and boyfriends!
I would leave my Girlfriend if she purchased that Dice Shaker. I would be ashamed to be with someone who can't see a rip off like that from a mile away. I would also be somewhat insulted that she would spend 88 dollars on a dice shaker instead of simply giving me 88 dollars to by something worthwhile. I am exaggerating of course but I would question my future with a partner who thought it would be a good idea to buy an 88 dollar dice shaker. Thankfully my current GF has learnt to ask first since I am a hard man to buy things for.
Stronghold assault is still relevant? I thought it was all in the apocalypse book or something? I forgot the book existed and I thought it was because it was irrelevant.
Haldir wrote: Yes agreed , but expressing your displeasure could be better served by emailing. GW directly. The more emails they receive the better. Right?
And can't people email GW AND discuss it in the forums? It's not like you can only do one or the other.
I really don't get this kind of censoring in the forums. Disagree with what people say or what people vent about, but don't tell them what they can or can't say. I might disagree with people but I don't tell them they should stop talking.
Swastakowey wrote: I would leave my Girlfriend if she purchased that Dice Shaker. I would be ashamed to be with someone who can't see a rip off like that from a mile away. I would also be somewhat insulted that she would spend 88 dollars on a dice shaker instead of simply giving me 88 dollars to by something worthwhile. I am exaggerating of course but I would question my future with a partner who thought it would be a good idea to buy an 88 dollar dice shaker. Thankfully my current GF has learnt to ask first since I am a hard man to buy things for.
Stronghold assault is still relevant? I thought it was all in the apocalypse book or something? I forgot the book existed and I thought it was because it was irrelevant.
Wow, harsh man. My wife has bought me way more useless things. And I've given her plenty of things a lot of peeps would consider useless, from jewelry to purses and shoes. Or even an expensive scarf. I personally like surprises. But whatever, to each their own relationship
Stronghold Assault is the book for fortifications (it has siege missions too). Many stores stock it, and it's directly referred to as containing most of the fortification rules in BRB.
Units include Firestorm Redoubt, Aegis Defense Line, Void Field Generator, Aquila Strongpoint, Bastion, Skyshield, etc.
You kinda need it if you want to use the Fortification slot in CAD. Well, excluding plasma obliterator
Talys wrote: I want to see actual plastic parts that are more complex, or as Insaniak put it, capable of dealing with undercuts in a different way. This would (truly) excite me. Like a bolter I didn't have to drill out, or fill the top and bottom of? HELL YA.
I don't know about Gundams because frankly I have zero interest in them (yeah, I'm one of those people who think they look like toys ). I actually don't know why people keep harping on about Gundams without actually demonstrating their superiority. Low res pictures of the sprue really don't demonstrate anything other than the fact they are multicoloured which in and of itself is not all that important.
But in the context of wargaming, have a look at these, this really blows me away, the track and wheel assembly on this model is one piece...
The only way to get the detail on surface of those tracks is to have undercuts. This is the layouts of the sprue...
It may seem like only a small thing.... but the alternative is to have a model with no detail on the tracks (eww...) or have a 2 piece track like plastic soldier company uses (ergh...) so it really blows me away how they managed such good detail on these kits without resorting to having lots of pieces the gamer has to assemble.
Haldir wrote: Yes agreed , but expressing your displeasure could be better served by emailing. GW directly. The more emails they receive the better. Right?
And can't people email GW AND discuss it in the forums? It's not like you can only do one or the other.
I really don't get this kind of censoring in the forums. Disagree with what people say or what people vent about, but don't tell them what they can or can't say. I might disagree with people but I don't tell them they should stop talking.
Yea this is how it slowly starts.. Apologists starting to tell you this and that and what you can say and not. Screw them.
Sounds like a few of these fanbois seen too much sunlight and needs to be pushed back down to the basements that they live in for their own safety. The war is over. GW has lost. They are a non issue as "THE" modeling company and are fighting to stay alive at a level to give the illusion that they were the same company when they put out 5th ED 40K.
They are not.
The company that has benefited the most I believe from GW's downsizing is Asmodee. They are the company that better positioned themselves to take on Hasbro and Mattel with their merger with Fantasy Flight Games. That company that does both board and miniatures games.
Don't like the crap GW is putting out these days and I'm just waiting for Kirby to cash in when he retires.
Talking about 'fanbois' then talking about GW losing a war
A non issue as a company as well? You'll have to clarify that chap, beyond your own opinion.
Try and make this a reasoned response please, as I'm not a 'fanboy'. I'm mostly a Malifaux player, with a smattering of Guildball, Dreadball, and soon to be KoW and Dungeon Saga.
There are so many things that GW could do to save themselves but they are blindly carrying on regardless. The one and only good thing about AoS is that the rules are allegedly a living document and they are free; that's just a drop of pure water in an ocean of gak though.
Next years financial report will make interesting reading.
Hey Talys, here's some pics I took trying to get both the detail on the sprues and the articulation of the inner frame, BTW, the moving parts on the inner frame were cast that way on the sprue. I took a picture of the inner frame sprue from the book to show how they were put on the sprue, etc. Like I said, I'm in the process of putting it together.
There are so many things that GW could do to save themselves but they are blindly carrying on regardless. The one and only good thing about AoS is that the rules are allegedly a living document and they are free; that's just a drop of pure water in an ocean of gak though.
Next years financial report will make interesting reading.
'Good things' are subjective but..
Living Rulebook
A change in the story
Awesome new models
A game that doesn't attract WAAC players
Are four of the reasons I'll be dipping my toes into AoS. And this goes for a few at my FLGS. If I was like some on here, I'd say 'loads of people like the models, and the more casual approach is working wonders I've heard'
I'm not convinced that throwing away most of the rules and balance will prevent WAAC players. Now they can field literally anything they want, with no way to restrain them (apart from the sudden death conditions if you're more than 33% outnumbered. Which won't do anything if you're up against Nagash and 9 Greater Demons).
All the systems currently used to restrain the WAAC players have been removed.
...With all the detail stripped out of the rules. I can't help but think of how that almost killed off Epic, until GW started adding stuff back in again to compensate for the sharp decline in interest .
A change in the story
...Which is great if you wanted a new setting to game in. Less so if you liked the old setting.
For me, it was the more or less generic fantasy-ness of the WHFB setting that made it appealing. It was a game of Elves and Dwarves and wizards fighting in a quasi-historical, almost familiar world.
Now? It's something else.
Awesome new models
...That are completely out of scale with the previous awesome models...
A game that doesn't attract WAAC players
Er .. What?
It's a game that wont attract people who like fiddly rules , certainly.
But I'm having a hard time thinking of any way that this game could have been more suited to WAAC play than it currently is .
You get people with A WAAC mentality in ANY game. Give them a game system where they can literally put whatever they want on the table ?
That's like spreading honey on your belly and then trying to cuddle a bear.
Interestingly the only WAAC players that I have met play 40K or WHFB, I have yet to encounter one that plays another system. Doubtless they exist but they certainly seem to be thinner on the ground.
I'm not convinced that throwing away most of the rules and balance will prevent WAAC players. Now they can field literally anything they want, with no way to restrain them (apart from the sudden death conditions if you're more than 33% outnumbered. Which won't do anything if you're up against Nagash and 9 Greater Demons).
All the systems currently used to restrain the WAAC players have been removed.
Ahh. But now, that person doing that knows he'll not get a game. Certainly in my area. I heard a good description about the organising of an AoS game. Agreeing to a social contract. This talking, and discussion will balance things enough for me. All discussion I've had (in real life, not the repetitive headbanging online) has people known for being WAAC A-holes not interested, and those interested in a narrative based game excited for a game.
I see a lot of 'this game is for kids' then people getting shouted down for saying that if you aproach from an adult attitude, it's potentially a fun game.
All I know is that I'll be buying more models that if this had been a straight up rules release. And I'm happy, as they look ace. I enjoyed the games I've played more than any Ed8 game. And the one or two snipy lads in my local store (one of which is on here), I'll enjoy the game even more as it's flying in the face of the negative attitude that ruins this hobby.
Interestingly the only WAAC players that I have met play 40K or WHFB, I have yet to encounter one that plays another system. Doubtless they exist but they certainly seem to be thinner on the ground.
WM has it's fair share, admittedly I've moved FLGS and it's a hell of a lot better. But I've seen more 40k and WHFBWAAC players than any other system, granted.
Ahh. But now, that person doing that knows he'll not get a game. Certainly in my area. I heard a good description about the organising of an AoS game. Agreeing to a social contract. This talking, and discussion will balance things enough for me. All discussion I've had (in real life, not the repetitive headbanging online) has people known for being WAAC A-holes not interested, and those interested in a narrative based game excited for a game.
I see a lot of 'this game is for kids' then people getting shouted down for saying that if you aproach from an adult attitude, it's potentially a fun game.
All I know is that I'll be buying more models that if this had been a straight up rules release. And I'm happy, as they look ace. I enjoyed the games I've played more than any Ed8 game. And the one or two snipy lads in my local store (one of which is on here), I'll enjoy the game even more as it's flying in the face of the negative attitude that ruins this hobby.
Errr... wouldn't it be a lot easier if GW actually made a balanced game rather than just took rules from other companies, removed all methods of balance from those rules and threw them out and told the players to fix their broken mess?
I mean, with a balanced game you could turn up and say I want to play a 1500pt game or whatever and know that it's going to be fun. Rather than turning up and say I want to play a game using X numbers of wounds (or scrolls or whatever) and I don't want to play against an Army which is only made up of A, B, Y and Z.
Ahh. But now, that person doing that knows he'll not get a game. Certainly in my area. I heard a good description about the organising of an AoS game. Agreeing to a social contract. This talking, and discussion will balance things enough for me. All discussion I've had (in real life, not the repetitive headbanging online) has people known for being WAAC A-holes not interested, and those interested in a narrative based game excited for a game.
I see a lot of 'this game is for kids' then people getting shouted down for saying that if you aproach from an adult attitude, it's potentially a fun game.
All I know is that I'll be buying more models that if this had been a straight up rules release. And I'm happy, as they look ace. I enjoyed the games I've played more than any Ed8 game. And the one or two snipy lads in my local store (one of which is on here), I'll enjoy the game even more as it's flying in the face of the negative attitude that ruins this hobby.
Errr... wouldn't it be a lot easier if GW actually made a balanced game rather than just took rules from other companies, removed all methods of balance from those rules and threw them out and told the players to fix their broken mess?
I mean, with a balanced game you could turn up and say I want to play a 1500pt game or whatever and know that it's going to be fun. Rather than turning up and say I want to play a game using X numbers of wounds (or scrolls or whatever) and I don't want to play against an Army which is only made up of A, B, Y and Z.
When I play AoS it's balanced. I'm no rules genius, so I guess that's luck.
When I play AoS it's balanced. I'm no rules genius, so I guess that's luck.
Wrong. You /feel/ that it's balanced. That's a major difference. It's like an Australian going to Europe and while Europeans are sweating at 40°, the Australian claims it's "humid". Objectively, it's still hot (above body temperature) but subjectively, the temperature is perceived as "normal" by the Australian.
When I play AoS it's balanced. I'm no rules genius, so I guess that's luck.
Or you're playing against friends, or at least people wanting the same thing out of the game you do.
Some of us have to just play against people we've never met at stores, or, god forbid, enjoy playing at tournaments where you might be forced to play That Guy.
The best case scenario there is you decide beforehand that you and your opponent aren't going to have fun playing each other and you don't get a game.
Alternatively, GW could put effort into balancing their game and two players could decide to play a game at a certain points limit and have a fair, fun, game no matter what*.
*(well, assuming no one is cheating or acting like a general , but a fluffy player can have a game with a competitive player and both enjoy it.)
Haldir wrote: But hey if you are unhappy why are you venting here?
Because discussion forums are a place for that?
Swastakowey wrote:
Haldir wrote: Yes agreed , but expressing your displeasure could be better served by emailing. GW directly. The more emails they receive the better. Right?
Us players in NZ and AUS organized a mailer late last year. We all got the same automated reply from GW saying the pricing is good/necessary for the company.
Fast forward to now and they are trying to sell us a dice shaker for 88 dollars.
There was also a pretty huge GW change petition not long after that got heaps of signatures.
Now they are trying to sell me 3 inches of metal for 65 dollars and trying to sell me a half assed game with 25 dollar basic sigmarines.
I would love it if GW listened to any of their customers, but I hear they pride themselves in not listening.
In short, tried your way and failed. Anyway complaining on the internet is how our club stopped GW games and played/purchased worthwhile games. So far more good has come from the complainers than talking to GW so why not continue that instead.
Suck, but oh well.
All this. QFT. Very much so. The only thing that GW listens to is their bottom line. And from the looks of things that's all that too many GW fans want to listen to, as well.
Silent Puffin? wrote:
Next years financial report will make interesting reading.
I predict a slight upwards bump from AoS starters, then business as usual. (i.e. less business) Based on... magic powers, or something.
removed all methods of balance from those rules and threw them out and told the players to fix their broken mess?
You contradict yourself. How is it they remove 'all' methods of balance, but at the same time leave it in the hands of players to take the game in whatever direction they want?
Gw are not interested in 'organised play'. They're not interested in telling you 'how precisely' to play a game. As hugely flawed as their methods and their games are, they get that their customer base is a fractured mess where everyone wants something different. The only way to really cater to this and give everyone what they want is to put control of the game in the players' hands rather than gw holding their hands and telling them what to do and how to play.
Seems the players are the balancing factor. You're falling into the fallacy of believing points costs are needed and that these act as the balancing factor.. Don't get me wrong - they help greatly. But they're not strictly needed. Plenty historicals, eg hail Caesar don't use points costs at all. What gets played? What makes sense, and what's appropriate Within the context of the narrative/story you are playing. points costs work brilliantly, when used right, but often can make games stifling and rigid.
I mean, with a balanced game you could turn up and say I want to play a 1500pt game or whatever and know that it's going to be fun.
Will it though? 1500pts of x meets 1500pts of y in the wild, roll scenario and 'go'? Fine for a pick up game, and necessary for a tournament. But not all games are pick up games or tournaments. What if I want a scenario, or a campaign. Or a themed mission that isn't out of a tournament packet.
Rather than turning up and say I want to play a game using X numbers of wounds (or scrolls or whatever) and I don't want to play against an Army which is only made up of A, B, Y and Z.
Then don't play? Organise ahead f time and communicate with your opponents. If you, or he is the type of person who slaps down a dozen dragons againat your marauders, is he really the kind of guy you want to be playing. 'Don't be a dick' goes a long way...
Errr... wouldn't it be a lot easier if GW actually made a balanced game
No. It's a lot of work, actually.
And that's what we're paying them for.
Gw are not interested in 'organised play'. They're not interested in telling you 'how precisely' to play a game. As hugely flawed as their methods and their games are, they get that their customer base is a fractured mess where everyone wants something different. The only way to really cater to this and give everyone what they want is to put control of the game in the players' hands rather than gw holding their hands and telling them what to do and how to play.
I can't see a free for all doing anything but driving gaming styles further apart. With everything in the rules, you've got a good starting point.
Will it though? 1500pts of x meets 1500pts of y in the wild, roll scenario and 'go'? Fine for a pick up game, and necessary for a tournament. But not all games are pick up games or tournaments. What if I want a scenario, or a campaign. Or a themed mission that isn't out of a tournament packet.
It's much easier to make a narrative game out of a balanced one by dropping the balance, than it is to start with something with no balance.
Errr... wouldn't it be a lot easier if GW actually made a balanced game
No. It's a lot of work, actually.
... As hugely flawed as their methods and their games are, they get that their customer base is a fractured mess where everyone wants something different.
Funny how companies with a lot fewer resources (sometimes just one guy with a friendly local gaming group for playtesting. Playtesting! Imagine...) and sometimes with fairly large audiences of their own, manage to produce relatively tight and well-recieved games.
You contradict yourself. How is it they remove 'all' methods of balance, but at the same time leave it in the hands of players to take the game in whatever direction they want?
Er... because it's not a contradiction? They remove balancing factors and leave it up to the players to jam some back in. Simples. How many different mathammery, 'take x wounds divided by y to the coefficient of z', stopgap methods of balancing AoS have shown up just on Dakka, since the rules dropped?
You're falling into the fallacy of believing points costs are needed and that these act as the balancing factor.. Don't get me wrong - they help greatly. But they're not strictly needed. Plenty historicals, eg hail Caesar don't use points costs at all.
And players roared until Rick rolled (Rick rolled... snort guffaw) over and released several books of pointed army lists for all three of his pre-20thC rulesets.
Will it though? 1500pts of x meets 1500pts of y in the wild, roll scenario and 'go'? Fine for a pick up game, and necessary for a tournament. But not all games are pick up games or tournaments. What if I want a scenario, or a campaign. Or a themed mission that isn't out of a tournament packet.
And what if you don't want a scenario, or a campaign? That's the reason those people roared for pointed army lists. A game with a points system doesn't forbid you from playing scenarios or historic reenactments with it, but a game without a points system (or other balancing system) makes it a fair bit harder to play a simple line-em-up pickup game, or a scenario where each side takes X points of what they like. Coming up with a simple, unbalanced story is arguably more within the grasp of most gamers than performing all the playtesting themselves, in order to figure out the most appropriate points costs for all their minis.
Deadnight wrote: The only way to really cater to this and give everyone what they want is to put control of the game in the players' hands rather than gw holding their hands and telling them what to do and how to play. ...
That's not giving everyone what they want.
That's giving the people who want half a game that they can finish themselves what they want .
It's the equivalent of going to the movies , and getting half an hour of scene-setting and then just a blank screen for the next hour so that people can imagine for themselves how everything turned out.
If I want to create a game myself, I can do that without giving GW a cent .
Just the kind of work the largest wargaming company should be expected to put in for a flagship product.
You contradict yourself. How is it they remove 'all' methods of balance, but at the same time leave it in the hands of players to take the game in whatever direction they want?
That is not a contradiction. By removing all balancing mechanisms, it has to put it in the hands of the players because there's no way else to deal with it. What players decide to do isn't necessarily balance, and the base game has no outline for even an approximation of balance.
Gw are not interested in 'organised play'. They're not interested in telling you 'how precisely' to play a game. As hugely flawed as their methods and their games are, they get that their customer base is a fractured mess where everyone wants something different. The only way to really cater to this and give everyone what they want is to put control of the game in the players' hands rather than gw holding their hands and telling them what to do and how to play.
No, because a game that is easy to play, simple to understand, has little to no rule loopholes or vague wording, and has a tested method of determining balanced forces and an army building mechanism will work for any kind of play. No one will have to argue about what rule 'x' means, or that army 'Y' is horribly underpowered, because everything would be tested. You can still give players all the control they want and still provide a game that has frunctional rules with no ambiguity and a strong baseline to determine the relative strength of units.
Simple stuff. You can take a super ultra tournament game and play it like its mega casual, super lopsided, campaign/scenario driven truly beer and pretzels kind of game. You can't do it the opposite.
Seems the players are the balancing factor. You're falling into the fallacy of believing points costs are needed and that these act as the balancing factor.. Don't get me wrong - they help greatly. But they're not strictly needed. Plenty historicals, eg hail Caesar don't use points costs at all. What gets played? What makes sense, and what's appropriate Within the context of the narrative/story you are playing. points costs work brilliantly, when used right, but often can make games stifling and rigid.
Its not a fallacy. I see historicals thrown around a lot as a counter example. The issue is that some use a different method of 'army building', where the forces are either pre-generated for a specific scenario, or incredibly limited within a strict historical context. Playing historicals means that you're either re-enacting a specific example where the forces are already defined, or you're playing a 'what-if' scenario, but still using historical examples for what an army would have looked like in that day and age.
The same cannot be true for a fantasy game or sci-fi game. It just can't. Which means that line of thinking in the context of a fantasy or sci-fi game doesn't hold much water.
So, points costs are therefore the best option for a game that offers the players plenty of customization and free reign to build forces within some constraints. A properly done system will be heavily tested to ensure as level a playing field as possible. From there, players can either play pick-up games with equal forces, or decide to play a scenario, where they elect to have unequal forces, also based on points.
The only thing that would a game rigid would be the player's inability to think outside the box. You are always free to ignore and change whatever you like in a ruleset. Having a well implemented points system allows for all kinds of play.
Will it though? 1500pts of x meets 1500pts of y in the wild, roll scenario and 'go'? Fine for a pick up game, and necessary for a tournament. But not all games are pick up games or tournaments. What if I want a scenario, or a campaign. Or a themed mission that isn't out of a tournament packet.
You can still do that with points.
I'm not seeing the issue or your point. Just go play the scenario you want. Ignore the points. You can do what you like with the rules.
Then don't play? Organise ahead f time and communicate with your opponents. If you, or he is the type of person who slaps down a dozen dragons againat your marauders, is he really the kind of guy you want to be playing. 'Don't be a dick' goes a long way...
I see Hail Caesar thrown around a lot as an example of a game with no points system. My copy has an army list appendix with points for Romans and Britons, and Warlord sell extremely detailed army list books containing pointed lists for all sorts of armies and historical periods.
Are other people reading a different version of Hail Caesar to the one I bought, or something?
Da Boss wrote: I see Hail Caesar thrown around a lot as an example of a game with no points system. My copy has an army list appendix with points for Romans and Britons, and Warlord sell extremely detailed army list books containing pointed lists for all sorts of armies and historical periods.
Are other people reading a different version of Hail Caesar to the one I bought, or something?
IIRC the core book doesn't contain points, as it's designed to be a beer & pretzel game using a GM of some sort. All of the army books have points listed.
It's fairly easy to balance anyway as the units are standardized with very few (less than 10) special rules. A large unit of Greek heavy infantry is the same as a large unit of Persian heavy infantry.
Plus with historics the majority of games are using historic orders of battle (either based on a real battle, or what was likely to be available at the time). Nor does it have demons, necromancy, monsters and so on, so there's a lot less options for including anything totally out of whack.
Since you're dealing with humans Vs humans* things are generally fairly well balanced. There is a difference between conscripts and seasoned veterans but it's nothing like the difference between a human and an oge.
*Excepting Elephants and camelry, but they aren't that common.
You cannot, seriously cannot, compare a non historical wargame with a "true" historical wargame in terms of point costs.
Even the best Spartan Warriors are simple humans with long spears and shields. They might be better fighters than the common cannon fodder of armies of the same time period, but they'll still get hurt by the same weapons, kill a person with a stroke etc.
Space Marines MIGHT fit into the "still a human" categorie, but what about a Carnifex? You cannot use the same amount of "x (spartan) is roughly the same strength as y (cannon fodder)"
It does not work.
That's why all wargames neeeeeeeeeed some kind of balancing factor. Historicals don't.
(that is, you could slice off the chain swords, tubes, etc, and they'd fit perfectly well in to a Fantasy setting, 
.JPG)
I don't think it's very much less complicated or detailed than a 
Low res pictures of the sprue really don't demonstrate anything other than the fact they are multicoloured which in and of itself is not all that important.
, but a fluffy player can have a game with a competitive player and both enjoy it.)
