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.

Kasrkinlegion wrote:As if it wasn't bad enough that the engines are modeled in three parts instead of two,

the two top parts don't have any pegs. You have to match the lines on the top detail and hold it together perfectly in order to make it work.

Both of these problems are exacerbated by the fact that they involve long thin pieces of plastic that warp easily.

Several pieces were also cast very poorly and had snapped on the sprue because the plastic was too thin.

If they were 2-part engines, they wouldn't have 3-D detailing. There'd be a goofy flat spot due to the use of metal molds.

As a scale modeler, not having pegs is not a problem if you're careful and precise. As this is a plastic kit, it'll go together just fine with standard plastic cement, so I don't see any problem as long as there's sufficient surface area to get a good join. Now, if you're foolishly using CA to assemble a plastic model, then that's your fault, not the kit design.

Long thin pieces of plastic are easy to unwarp with a hair dryer or warm water. Scale modelers do this all the time.

Snapping is a problem, and that ties to bad mold / part design. Like the old 3E SM knives. Those things sucked.

LunaHound wrote:@kanluwen:

Solution to all the thing you just said =

buy lower grade.

By "lower grade", I'm assuming you're talking about Ben-Di and other knockoff of Bandai HG kit?

And the 1/144 HG kits aren't *that* fragile. It's the larger 1/100 Master Grade / Perfect Grade kits that are real problems - you cannot game with them.

Kasrkinlegion wrote:... A model which costs $60 from any other company is generally going to have far superior detail, be much larger, or both.

IMO, you are grossly misinformed. The Baneblade is competitively priced with anything else in its size class. Same with any of GW's newer kits.

Now, if you are comparing decades-old kits like the Leman Russ, that might be true. But then, you'd have to compare with decades-old kits from Revell or Airfix, rather than Japanese / Hong Kong kits that weren't well known at the time.

____

aka_mythos wrote:GW designs their models to be actively handled, so the plastic is generally thicker.

Another issue is that GW models are not scale models. Scale models take a ultra-realistic approach,

Exactly.

GW models will survive a drop off a table with far less damage than any comparable scale model ever would. Scale parts make for much thinner and more fragile details that are far more easily broken.


I *dare* someone to take an individual-link Dragon Panzer kit of comparable size to a Baneblade and drop it from a foot off the tabletop, tracks down.

Then do the same with a Baneblade...

Baneblade wins on durabilty hands down.

The point is that the Baneblade is designed to be played with by people not wearing kid gloves. The M1 and other scale models simply cannot be handled anywhere near the same way. That is, the Baneblade is more *durable*, because it was designed that way.

Kouzuki wrote:Uhh... If you honestly think Bandai's Gundam models are more fragile than GW's figures ... wow... what..? Have you ever built/handled a Gundam model before? They're pretty damn sturdy, especially for their size. Granted some joints may be weaker than others, but still.

Yes, I've got plenty enough Gundams going back nearly 20 years.

The joints get sloppy over time, and then the robot won't stand up so well. This is more of a problem with the larger kits that tend to be top-heavy & more unbalanced.

FWIW, whenever I've built a 40k tank, I build it "buttoned up", with all hatches glued shut. It makes for a sturdier gaming piece.

In the far future of the 41st millenium, there are only thick-walled vehicles!