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

Went into GeeDub to checkout this finecast stuff for myself...

It doesn't look a lot better than metal. It still has flash and mould lines and some dire vents (lelith hesperax with what looked like a beard!)
In addition I seen a DE archon which had so much flash that it looked as if half of the sprue had a sheet of plastic over it.. very poor.

I think this is the beginning of the end.

For those that are interested I just did an over night stripping test on some spare bits of sprue using Fairy Power spray.
I normally strip FW resin minis in the stuff and have had no problems sometimes leaving the stuff in the mix for days so I was eager to see the results.

The result was that it did clean the stuff really well...

...unfortunately though it has softened the material a great deal, the bits of flash that I left on the sprues have also basically turned to rubber. :(

Given the fact that there is a lot of fine detail like pointing fingers or swords I strongly recommend that you don't use fairy power spray unless you like rubber minis.

I'll give it another try leaving it in the mix for half an hour and see how that works.

probably another way to make you spend more
"I wanna repaint this mini"
*strips mini and it turns to rubber*
"oh no now I have to spend another £569 on 1 barely 2 inch model that was already ful of holes, oh well mommy and daddy will buy it for me because they are rich and dumb...like me YAY"

Stella Cadente wrote:probably another way to make you spend more
"I wanna repaint this mini"
*strips mini and it turns to rubber*
"oh no now I have to spend another £569 on 1 barely 2 inch model that was already ful of holes, oh well mommy and daddy will buy it for me because they are rich and dumb...like me YAY"

Wow...

You managed to be a crackpot conspiracy theorist, insulting to a large number of people, and made 3 sweeping generalisations, in 4 lines.
Impressive.

I might as well point out the errors in your argument rather than just comment on the crass nature of your post.

1. We don't know whether the "turning to rubber" was a property of the resin, or whether the model just got left in for too long.

2. No models cost £569

3. Not every "child who plays Warhammer"'s parents are rich, the child could be spending all of their pocket money on models/ be brought them as a birthday present.

4. Are you insinuating that every child who plays warhammer is dumb, as are their parents? Because there are a lot of parents on this forum, and there are a fair number of "teaching my son/daughter to paint" threads. I'm fairly sure that they would disagree with you.

nectarprime wrote:

puma713 wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:Then my point stands. The Shokk Attack Gun is a lot more than just a Big Mek mini and it was always much more expensive than the other Big Mek miniatures. People refer to that kit as the Shokk Attack Gun, not a Big Mek. It's the artillery piece in the kit that sells it, if people want just a Big Mek they buy a Big Mek, not an expensive Shokk Attack Gun. Go ahead, think about that for a while and stop being obtuse, silly and rude.

Actually, your point doesn't stand at all. You said my statement was false. It wasn't false. The model is a Big Mek (I can give you the website addy if you want, but you seem proficient enough to look it up for yourself), not a "Shokk Attack Gun", no matter what people call it. So, pointing out that a Big Mek being $38, which is almost as much as Killa Kans at $44.50 isn't fallacious in any regard. Whatsoever.

Seems like you were being rude in the first place. And obtuse. But I'm not sure the latter was as intentional as the former.

You mad son?

I loled. Take it easy

Chaos Dreadnought isn't in resin yet, is it? Yes! I can still get a metal bawkes

Cadaver wrote:

I definitely agree Specialists Games should be a bigger focus. It allows people to get into the hobby without investing hundreds of dollars, let alone the time involved in painting larger armies. I exclusively play SGs these days, since the level of commitment I have allows me enough time to play smaller, quicker games I can get in on a weeknight with friends. I really hope there is either an option alternate rules set in 6th edition, like Kill Team was (although hopefully slightly more expansive) or alternatively, an expansion, which allows for smaller, yet balanced games using a variation of the core rules. I'm not optimistic, but a version of 40k that is in more direct competition with WarmaHordes would be great. I'd honestly have given Privateer Press a go if I could get over the look of their miniatures.

.

Not sure if you have tried it, but have you considered Infinity? I so wish I had discovered it a couple of years ago, the game system and models are absolutely superb, it's just so ... hmmm... I think 'dynamic' is the word that best suits it.

Goliath wrote:

Stella Cadente wrote:probably another way to make you spend more
"I wanna repaint this mini"
*strips mini and it turns to rubber*
"oh no now I have to spend another £569 on 1 barely 2 inch model that was already ful of holes, oh well mommy and daddy will buy it for me because they are rich and dumb...like me YAY"

Wow...

You managed to be a crackpot conspiracy theorist, insulting to a large number of people, and made 3 sweeping generalisations, in 4 lines.
<snip>

This reminds me of some wisdom I heard long ago...

Goliath wrote:

Stella Cadente wrote:probably another way to make you spend more
1. We don't know whether the "turning to rubber" was a property of the resin, or whether the model just got left in for too long.

Yeah my thoughts exactly, I'm going to try a half hour strip test next which works on most models. It also might be something in the power spray reacting with the material and maybe something else like simple green may not have such an adverse effect, but don't know about that one.

Regular FW resin survives in the stuff really well though which is why I wanted to do a proper test first then play around to see what happens.

I'm going to chuck the bits in the freezer for a while and see if that has any effect on the finer bits as at the moment the biggest problem is the results of the flash which was rubberised the most. Basically it's as flexible as the bristles on a brush on the test flash bits, has no resistance what so ever.

BrassScorpion wrote:

Your response to "This stuff costs too much" seems to be "Well they could have made it cost more! Are you happy now?!" with a dash of "They were going to make it cost more anyway so HA!" thrown in. It doesn't really even address the "This stuff costs too much" argument, much less invalidate it as you seem to be thinking it should.

You're inferring an awful lot that just is not there.

My point, which I thought I made abundantly clear in plain English, was that saying Finecast is a rip-off specifically was fallacious. GW prices are high and they just went up again. It would have happened whether or not the blister pack models were still pewter or not. In other words, the issue of price is there regardless of Finecast, not because of it. I didn't say discussing whether or not prices are too high was not a legitimate topic, nor was I specifically defending or criticizing the prices though I added some comments of my own about pricing getting rather high (e.g., Catachans). People who were paying attention may have noticed that. There does seem to be some misguided attempts by some, however, to blame all the price issues on Finecast and I don't believe that's a valid idea, nor do I believe Finecast is any more or less a rip-off depending on one's perspective on the matter than the rest of the GW product line.

If there was less getting exercise jumping to conclusions on forums then every post with a slightly complex idea wouldn't require multiple explanations and these threads would be a lot less cluttered.

Very good points that I mostly agree with the cost was going to go up anyway just like every other year..... the problem is that GW wasn't smart enough to separate the release of Finecast with the price increase. It would have gone over much better if they had waited several months for the price increase. This way in the mind of gamers the price increase would not have been because of Finecast.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cadaver wrote:

However, no one will bemoan, say Lexus, because I am priced out of the GS 460. There are always other, more reasonably priced cars to purchase. Just as their are lower priced models available, although usually of lesser quality. The difference for most people, is that they already own armies, yet they want the newer models, but they don't actually need them.

Now to continue the car metaphor, they do require maintenance occasionally, i.e. new codexes, rulebooks, etc. But just as people can keep driving their older car, they can keep playing with their existing armies. They are not entitled to barebones prices on new releases, just as people aren't entitled to brand new cars for low costs, just because they are a previous customer of the company. GW is not unique in that regard to any other large corporation. The fact that they produce a product that people feel passionately about, does not entitle their fans to special treatment. The consumer ultimately has the choice whether or nor to support a company. If they are not happy with the cost or quality of the product, they are always free to take their business elsewhere.

I'm not sure this is a good analogy. People need to keep up their car or buy a new one eventually to continue using it. This is not the case with GW miniatures. Someone can still use their miniatures old miniatures (generally speaking of course) and never need to upgrade. GW should be actively getting people to not only upgrade their old miniatures but to buy a second or third army. Large price increases certainly hurt them in this area.

Regarding Finecast, I am amused at how many convulsions of praise and apologetics 40k Radio can fit into their piece about GW's new direction, all the while underestimating and insulting the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with them. Classic Battlefoam, in fact.

I'm just amused that everyone complained about how much they hated metal miniatures for the longest time. Now they're gone and people complain that they're gone. I understand we hate price hikes but those would have happend anyway. People wanted more plastic, these are plastic in the only way achievable at this scale and volume of production. Aside from the price, I really think this is generally a good thing.

brettz123 wrote:Very good points that I mostly agree with the cost was going to go up anyway just like every other year..... the problem is that GW wasn't smart enough to separate the release of Finecast with the price increase. It would have gone over much better if they had waited several months for the price increase. This way in the mind of gamers the price increase would not have been because of Finecast.

People probably would have taken to Finecast better if GW had raised the price of the metal miniatures inline with expectations and then brought the price down to the the Finecast ranges release price.

Stella Cadente wrote:
"I wanna repaint this mini"
*strips mini and it turns to rubber*
"oh no now I have to spend another £569 on 1 barely 2 inch model that was already ful of holes, oh well mommy and daddy will buy it for me because they are rich and dumb...like me YAY"

GW has no obligation to make its products compatible with aftermarket cleaning agents. There are chemicals you could use to clean paint that'd do the same to plastic. There are chemicals to remove paint that could digest metal. GW isn't responsible for what you do.

When I haven't been sure about what chemicals might do to a model... I soak them in soapy water overnight and use a dental pick to pull the paint off.

Agamemnon2 wrote:Regarding Finecast, I am amused at how many convulsions of praise and apologetics 40k Radio can fit into their piece about GW's new direction, all the while underestimating and insulting the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with them. Classic Battlefoam, in fact.

I dont listen to the channel but glad to see they have some independent view on finecasts
Time for a fridge mini bag.

aka_mythos wrote:

brettz123 wrote:Very good points that I mostly agree with the cost was going to go up anyway just like every other year..... the problem is that GW wasn't smart enough to separate the release of Finecast with the price increase. It would have gone over much better if they had waited several months for the price increase. This way in the mind of gamers the price increase would not have been because of Finecast.

People probably would have taken to Finecast better if GW had raised the price of the metal miniatures inline with expectations and then brought the price down to the the Finecast ranges release price.

True they could have done any number of things but they should never have released Finecast and raised the price at virtually the same time. Poor planning.

Yep. The issue was the two coinciding.

Though it probably didn't help that some miniatures released less than 2 months previous (Grey Knights, Orcs, DE) were re-released with a price rise as well.

Friend pointed out a better plan.

Start of year - announce there will be no new metals. Release finecast instead - all new stuff in new medium. Then gradually phase older metals out and re-release as finecast.

It should have been a gradual thing instead of what we did get.

And the first things released should have been key elements for each army - characters, one or two special units, monster.

Instead we get some armies that are practically all finecast and plastic (Dark Eldar...) and others that got practically nothing (Lizardmen only got Kroq Gar - leaving all the skink characters, the terradons, kroxigor, salamanders, razordons, chameleon skinks, saurus characters and slann in the lurch!).

DarkStarSabre wrote:

Instead we get some armies that are practically all finecast and plastic (Dark Eldar...) and others that got practically nothing (Lizardmen only got Kroq Gar - leaving all the skink characters, the terradons, kroxigor, salamanders, razordons, chameleon skinks, saurus characters and slann in the lurch!).

You forgot about Ogres--- they got NO Finecast models at all.

nectarprime wrote:You forgot about Ogres--- they got NO Finecast models at all.

Nor Witchhunters or Necrons.

However if you read the other rumour threads Ogres, Sisters of Battle and Necrons are -all- currently being rumoured as WIP for updates - makes sense the next few armies to be updated don't get stuff because, well, pipeline already. But I doubt Lizardmen are due to be updated any time soon and I've heard nary a peep about Tau.

doghouse wrote:For those that are interested I just did an over night stripping test on some spare bits of sprue using Fairy Power spray.
I normally strip FW resin minis in the stuff and have had no problems sometimes leaving the stuff in the mix for days so I was eager to see the results.

The result was that it did clean the stuff really well...

...unfortunately though it has softened the material a great deal, the bits of flash that I left on the sprues have also basically turned to rubber. :(

Given the fact that there is a lot of fine detail like pointing fingers or swords I strongly recommend that you don't use fairy power spray unless you like rubber minis.

I'll give it another try leaving it in the mix for half an hour and see how that works.

This raises another very intersting point about finecast.

If finecast is a more difficult material to strip without damaging the model itself, I don't believe for a moment that GW isn't aware of it and pleased. Whether it was a major factor in their decisions is unknowable.

Simple green and other "safe" stripping agents might work well (I'll make a point to buy a painted finecast in a year or two) but as Finecast has already been shown to not react well to files, it makes one wonder what effect vigorous scrubbing with a stiff bristle brush would have on it. Also, will the relative porosity (compared to metal or plastic) make it more difficult to remove the paint?

I know I am not alone in appreciating the fact that with the correct application of chemicals, metal models can almost always be returned to a nearly new appearance. I doubt that finecast will have this ability, in fact I suspect it will be worse than plastic in this regard.

Taking the discussion even further. What effect might finecast have on the second hand GW market?

Wow...

You managed to be a crackpot conspiracy theorist, insulting to a large number of people, and made 3 sweeping generalisations, in 4 lines.
Impressive.

I might as well point out the errors in your argument rather than just comment on the crass nature of your post.

1. We don't know whether the "turning to rubber" was a property of the resin, or whether the model just got left in for too long.

2. No models cost £569

3. Not every "child who plays Warhammer"'s parents are rich, the child could be spending all of their pocket money on models/ be brought them as a birthday present.

4. Are you insinuating that every child who plays warhammer is dumb, as are their parents? Because there are a lot of parents on this forum, and there are a fair number of "teaching my son/daughter to paint" threads. I'm fairly sure that they would disagree with you.

Whoa, some people cant take a joke huh?
Of course no model costs £569! Its called sarcasm......would you like me to spell it out for you? In crayon? If you like you can PM me with your address and ill send you my copy of 'Spot's Guide To Humour'.

Its a pop up, so should be fine for you....

doghouse wrote:For those that are interested I just did an over night stripping test on some spare bits of sprue using Fairy Power spray.
I normally strip FW resin minis in the stuff and have had no problems sometimes leaving the stuff in the mix for days so I was eager to see the results.

The result was that it did clean the stuff really well...

...unfortunately though it has softened the material a great deal, the bits of flash that I left on the sprues have also basically turned to rubber. :(

Given the fact that there is a lot of fine detail like pointing fingers or swords I strongly recommend that you don't use fairy power spray unless you like rubber minis.

I'll give it another try leaving it in the mix for half an hour and see how that works.

Anyone know the equivalent of fairy power in the US? I don't plan on buying any failmiscast minis so I won't be able to help you much but it's probably a good idea that we get a list of cleaning agents commonly used across the world and their effect (or lack of) on the new material. If anything, I'd suggest cutting a few notches in the excess sprue around a model, then painting it (making sure paint gets in those notches to simulate detail) and stripping only that piece so as not to damage the actual miniature (like you did). Also, even after the initial test is over, leave the piece in the solution. The reason I say this is that I had alot of trouble stripping a resin model with simple green (don't know if it was the variety of paint as I bought it second hand) and tested a piece of FW sprue in brake fluid to make sure it didn't damage it. After a few days, the piece was fine so I successfully stripped the resin mini without any problem... and promptly forgot about that test piece of sprue at the bottom of the cup. When I emptied the container of the brake fluid a month later, the resin was soft and rubberly like you described.

While it probably wasn't the deciding factor in choosing the material, the lessened chance of being able to successfully strip second hand minis is probably marked off as a "pro" and not a "con" in GW"s books as that will lead to more first hand sales.

What gets me about all this is peoples' acceptance over the odd flaw & saying things like 'it'll just take a bit of green stuff to sort that out'.
We are now being asked to pay a premium on a range that is called 'Finecast'.
In my mind there should be no need to fix any flaws - a bit of cleaning up, yes but not having to fill in holes and remodel a gun's iron sight.
I feel most sorry for kids who will get a charater model for their birthday or at Christmas. This will most probably be bought by someone who doesn't realise that they should check the model in the blister to make sure it's all good. Then the child will open it and he/she will not realise that there are details / swords / iron sights missing.

I am really worried about how many boxes I demand to be opened in the store when i buy an elite squad box (which is not see through) before I am satisfied with the models.

As a (very very very minor) shareholder I think I will write a letter (not e-mail) to GW and might CC the trade descriptions people (Office of Fair Trading?? - can someone confirm please).

Thoughts....

bubber wrote:What gets me about all this is peoples' acceptance over the odd flaw & saying things like 'it'll just take a bit of green stuff to sort that out'.
We are now being asked to pay a premium on a range that is called 'Finecast'.
In my mind there should be no need to fix any flaws.

I agree. My tolerance for repairing models operates on a sliding scale depending on the price of the model.

For the price of finecast, they should arrive trimmed of sprue and free of defect.

For all the hype and the premium price, the simple fact is that the finecast product has unacceptably high rate of flaws.

Eilif wrote:I agree. My tolerance for repairing models operates on a sliding scale depending on the price of the model.

For the price of finecast, they should arrive trimmed of sprue and free of defect.

For all the hype and the premium price, the simple fact is that the finecast product has unacceptably high rate of flaws.

In fairness its no different and no more work than how GW recommends using greenstuff to smooth and fill out the joints when you assembled metal miniatures.

Forgeworld models are more costly, don't come free of flaws and aren't trimmed off their sprue. So what basis are you using to say "for the price...they should..."?

I think the vast majority of defects are dealing with the fact that they released over a hundred blisters in a single go and that it likely was more than they normally have to deal with, given a normal release schedule of just 5 or 6 new blisters a month. Once they move from a high production rate to build stock and into a lower production rate to maintain it, their quality control should pick itself up. If you have defects complain and GW will replace your model, same as they always have.

Personally, I'd say for the price of fine cast, they should arrive de-sprued, cleaned and painted by a member of the 'Eavy Metal team.

aka_mythos wrote:

Eilif wrote:I agree. My tolerance for repairing models operates on a sliding scale depending on the price of the model.

For the price of finecast, they should arrive trimmed of sprue and free of defect.

For all the hype and the premium price, the simple fact is that the finecast product has unacceptably high rate of flaws.

In fairness its no different and no more work than how GW recommends using greenstuff to smooth and fill out the joints when you assembled metal miniatures.

Forgeworld models are more costly, don't come free of flaws and aren't trimmed off their sprue. So what basis are you using to say "for the price...they should..."?

I think the vast majority of defects are dealing with the fact that they released over a hundred blisters in a single go and that it likely was more than they normally have to deal with, given a normal release schedule of just 5 or 6 new blisters a month. Once they move from a high production rate to build stock and into a lower production rate to maintain it, their quality control should pick itself up. If you have defects complain and GW will replace your model, same as they always have.

It is different. I expect to sometimes have to do fit work between pieces, that's an unavoidable (though minimazible) aspect of multi-part cast models. I do not expect have to sculpt missing or damaged portions of models.

Forgeworld is a smaller, in-house cottage operation, so I expect higher prices due to low volume. Even so, I'd expect replacement for the same miscasts my Finecast models displayed.

While we can hope they will improve their quality control with Finecast, a lot of the damage is already done. People that have gotten poorly cast models are feeling burned, and that loss of customer confidence should be be worrisome to GW. I, for one, will be waiting months before I consider another Finecast purchase, and even then, I'm going to be more critical than I'd have been if my original purchase was to expectations.

I agree that finecast models ought to come off the sprue and flawless.

I was going to suggest someone try stripping finecast with simple green, but that apparently doesn't work on FW models. Maybe super clean?
EDIT:

Honestly I don't see all the extra detail that is supposed to be on finecast models. The resin Abbadon I looked at looked just like my metal one as far as I can tell. The big upside to finecast models seems, to me, to be the decreased weight over metal models.

Alendrel wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:]In fairness its no different and no more work than how GW recommends using greenstuff to smooth and fill out the joints when you assembled metal miniatures.

Forgeworld models are more costly, don't come free of flaws and aren't trimmed off their sprue. So what basis are you using to say "for the price...they should..."?

I think the vast majority of defects are dealing with the fact that they released over a hundred blisters in a single go and that it likely was more than they normally have to deal with, given a normal release schedule of just 5 or 6 new blisters a month. Once they move from a high production rate to build stock and into a lower production rate to maintain it, their quality control should pick itself up. If you have defects complain and GW will replace your model, same as they always have.

It is different. I expect to sometimes have to do fit work between pieces, that's an unavoidable (though minimazible) aspect of multi-part cast models. I do not expect have to sculpt missing or damaged portions of models.

This.

Also, as to the Forge world comparison.
1) I'm not using Forgeworld as my basis for comparison, because I don't think that forgewold models are worth the price either. My basis of comparison for judging GW is their own hype and the cost. However, if driven to a specific comparision, I'd note that for the cost, they come with far more flaws than "expensive" models like Infinity.
2) That said, FW gets a partial pass from me due to it being a limited run product and one aimed specifically at the experienced older modeler. Finecast is neither.

Lastly, we may be working from somewhat different points of refference. You seem to believe that the finecast product, without defect, is worth the asking price. Though I would expect such a high priced model to come trimmed, clean and free of defect, I still don't think that a Finecast model, presented in that condition, is worth the prices that GW is asking.

bubber wrote:What gets me about all this is peoples' acceptance over the odd flaw & saying things like 'it'll just take a bit of green stuff to sort that out'.
We are now being asked to pay a premium on a range that is called 'Finecast'.
In my mind there should be no need to fix any flaws - a bit of cleaning up, yes but not having to fill in holes and remodel a gun's iron sight.
I feel most sorry for kids who will get a charater model for their birthday or at Christmas. This will most probably be bought by someone who doesn't realise that they should check the model in the blister to make sure it's all good. Then the child will open it and he/she will not realise that there are details / swords / iron sights missing.

I am really worried about how many boxes I demand to be opened in the store when i buy an elite squad box (which is not see through) before I am satisfied with the models.

As a (very very very minor) shareholder I think I will write a letter (not e-mail) to GW and might CC the trade descriptions people (Office of Fair Trading?? - can someone confirm please).

Thoughts....

Yup. It does suck.

But, any defect you can just take to a GW store and have replaced.

FWIW, many other models that are not Finecast really need GS to look good. If you don't use GS on the Giant model from WHFB you will have giant seems all the way around. So it's not like guaranteed GSing is a new thing.

(I didn't use GS on my Giant and every time I look at it I get pissed off!!)

Alendrel wrote: It is different. I expect to sometimes have to do fit work between pieces, that's an unavoidable (though minimazible) aspect of multi-part cast models. I do not expect have to sculpt missing or damaged portions of models.

Forgeworld is a smaller, in-house cottage operation, so I expect higher prices due to low volume. Even so, I'd expect replacement for the same miscasts my Finecast models displayed.

No ones saying to accept major defects. GW has always shown a willingness to replace those. So when I'm talking about filling, its only with regards to dealing with minor blemishes... that are acceptable but maybe not ideal.

Also you're not quite interpreting my second line of thought right.

I wrote:Forgeworld models are more costly, don't come free of flaws and aren't trimmed off their sprue. So what basis are you using to say "for the price...they should..."?

People don't want to clean off these miniatures despite the fact they always had to before, despite the fact that more boutique products still require you to. This is a product more similar in manufacturing and material to FW than to GW's metal miniatures.

I was asking the other poster, why he and presumably you, think something that takes you one or two minutes should be done inclusively to the cost, when nothing like that has ever been done before. The extra costs of dealing with trimming sprues... cutting tools, containers to move parts in, cost to re-sort parts when packaging and/or check the presence of all parts... and a GW employees minutes... then profit margin for the investment of those resources. Do you really want to add $5 dollars to this already high price tag?

Alendrel wrote:
While we can hope they will improve their quality control with Finecast, a lot of the damage is already done. People that have gotten poorly cast models are feeling burned, and that loss of customer confidence should be be worrisome to GW. I, for one, will be waiting months before I consider another Finecast purchase, and even then, I'm going to be more critical than I'd have been if my original purchase was to expectations.

You're within your right to feel that way, but if you or others are getting defective miniatures, return them, get a refund or exchange them. Alot of the people who have posted defects have a tone of pouting acceptance of the situation. These people rather than paint these, convert these, etc need to engage GW and get what they paid for rather than just complain to an online community that has not actually ability to satisfy your woe.

In the 12+ years I've purchased GW miniatures, I have recieved about 8 defective kits... everything from a whirlwind and landraider missing individual pieces to a leman russ with a miscast turret... to a metal marine scout missing a head and arm... in every instance GW has replaced models completely... leaving me with in essence two of a kit... and a couple of times GW even threw in freebies... a free seer council and a squad of SoB... even a $15 gift card. Point is they have a history of putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to defects and if people step up GW will correct the errors.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eilif wrote:
...Lastly, we may be working from somewhat different points of refference. You seem to believe that the finecast product, without defect, is worth the asking price. Though I would expect such a high priced model to come trimmed, clean and free of defect, I still don't think that a Finecast model, presented in that condition, is worth the prices that GW is asking.

I think you've really made it clear you're problem is just GW pricing... you're confusing the situation by saying your problem is with "finecast." Finecast is GW's attempt to bridge the product line between plastic models and FW models, so ignoring that is ignoring GW's motives and expectations, which I think is half the story. I think you've come to the same point many others have: Games Workshop is too expensive for you and you really shouldn't buy it; you should find other interests.

I don't think that parts of models should come pre-cleaned. I think they should come pre-sculpted ETA: And when I say fitwork, I do include doing necessary green stuffing there.

And I will be returning all these items this weekend, and I've sent an email to GW explaining, calmly and in, detail my issues and dissatisfaction, with a link to my photobucket album. Their customer service is still top notch, though they are starting to shift away from the generosity of old. When I had an issue with a miscast on one of the legs of my Grey Knight Terminator kit back in April, they had me identify the specific leg (hooray for numbered components) and sent me just that one, whereas in the past, yes, they had sent out new kits for similar one-piece miscasts. It will be interesting to see if that is the new trend with replacements for plastic and Finecast: full kit replacements as a matter of course, or just the specific parts (up to full kits as needed).

aka_mythos wrote:I think you've really made it clear you're problem is just GW pricing... you're confusing the situation by saying your problem is with "finecast." Finecast is GW's attempt to bridge the product line between plastic models and FW models, so ignoring that is ignoring GW's motives and expectations, which I think is half the story. .

Not true. I've made no secret that my biggest issue is GW's pricing. However, that is in no way mutually exclusive to my asessment that GW's hype and pricepoint for Finecast should be reflected in a higher quality, better prepared product.

aka_mythos wrote: I think you've come to the same point many others have: Games Workshop is too expensive for you and you really shouldn't buy it; you should find other interests.

Perhaps you didn't mean this the way it looks in print, but if you did...
It's quite presumptuous to judge what is too expensive for someone whose finances you are not familiar with. I can afford GW at retail, but I choose to put my money into a variety of more reasonably priced alternatives (and some used GW products) in order to get more for my $.