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.

The facial scarring on the sergeant is a nice nod to the Demiurg background.

I'm not minding that they seem derivative - there's only so many ways to do bulky power armor.

I like them, but are there helmet options? I just hate it when models have massive armor totally compromised by a lack of helmets.

I love the irony of a set of miniatures from GW that I could use as proxies for Mantic minis. Oh, how the tables have turned!

Looking forward to using these in Deadzone!

 schoon wrote:
The facial scarring on the sergeant is a nice nod to the Demiurg background.

I'm not minding that they seem derivative - there's only so many ways to do bulky power armor.

Yeah, I think the sergeant has one of the nicer faces they have done so far for the squats, some of the faces could be better.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I like them, but are there helmet options? I just hate it when models have massive armor totally compromised by a lack of helmets.

I might be wrong on this but I think kits in the last few years have tended to have both face and helmet options for all units whereas that wasn't the policy in the past.

 Albertorius wrote:
See, however many "I think" you add, you also make quite clear what you think about everyone else's opinion. When you characterize everyone else's comments as "screeching", it makes quite clear what you mean by "I think".So... yeah

Oh cool so its no longer my whole comment now its just the last sentence. Ahmaaaazing.

Of course if you had actually bothered to read the thread properly you wouldn't have said this because you would know it was aimed at those people not realising I was replying to someone and going absolutely ballistic assuming that I thought they looked nothing like terran marines. But whatever, you can have your easy out.

derpherp wrote:
Too generic sci-fi or not dwarfy enough.

It's fair criticism, but had they leaned into less generic sci-fi and more dwarfy there would be people calling them hacks for lazy dwarf tropes so I don't think this is a battle that can be perfectly won. Someone wont like it no matter what they do.

Except those "lazy dwarf tropes" are what makes Dwarfs what they are. Acting as if the Leagues don't still have those typical Dwarf tropes seems to be completely missing what they are; they fit the Dwarf archetype with being short stoic hardy master craftsmen and miners with an importance on their culture, history, heritage, the Votann / Ancestors, enjoying beer, disliking elves, and the aesthetics of beards, runes, picks/axes, geometric patterns, the Dwarf-head as their faction icon and even incorporating that in their architecture to the point they have walls that are that design.

It's about wanting the miniatures to reflect that lore and what they are meant to be. For them to be a unique but still noticably Dwarfy take on the Dwarf Archetype in the same way as the Kharadron Overlords. The Dwarf theming needs to implemented throughout to show that side of their lore but so far it's on them in a way that feels jarring and like a complete afterthought that hasn't been done in a proper way.

There are plenty of way that could have made their designs more interesting without going too far either way. The options aren't mutually exclusive between "generic sci-fi" or "Too much Dwarf", you know.

If this was instead the Eldar you'd get the same sort of people who don't want a new Dwarf army to be Dwarfs going "You just want the Eldar to be Fantasy Elfs in Space, Boring!". Appealing to people who are against the idea in the first place at the expense of what they are isn't a good move.

Based on the units that were shown off thus far, here's my prediction for how the Squats' main tank will look like. It's probably gonna be called something like Einhyrjyr Syige Thank and it'll be the bestest tank ever in the galaxy.

That reminds me that this new take on Squats will be the worst thing in the history of forever unless GW makes a tracked tank that is a mobile brewery.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Based on the units that were shown off thus far, here's my prediction for how the Squats' main tank will look like. It's probably gonna be called something like Einhyrjyr Syige Thank and it'll be the bestest tank ever in the galaxy.

Hahahahah! That's a good 'un.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
It seems the Einhyr has some of the Dwarf embellishment stuff....on the sides of their ankles and facing upwards behind their head? Very odd places to put them, I feel like that side of their aesthetic is just being randomly stuck on without much thought.

Yep one of their bigger issues... just randomly sticking on some nordic bling that's totally out of context with the rest of the design.

Everybody knows anti-grav is needed (so fold those tracks under the hull at 90 degrees and you're set)

Well, if GW is going to steal from someone, I'd rather it be Blizzard. Seriously, sod those people and their company. If they have a problem with it, let them pursue the matter in court - what benefit is there to any of us to advocate for them pro-bono.

Also, thank you everybody for living up to my prediction

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
It seems the Einhyr has some of the Dwarf embellishment stuff....on the sides of their ankles and facing upwards behind their head? Very odd places to put them, I feel like that side of their aesthetic is just being randomly stuck on without much thought.

Yep one of their bigger issues... just randomly sticking on some nordic bling that's totally out of context with the rest of the design.

The bolter and the guy in the Command Centre artwork are alright but outside of those it's either missing entirely even though it should be there because it's part of their lore and theme, or has been stuck on randomly with no thought to making it fit on the model in a cohesive, natural looking way. The Theyn banner clashes with the Hearthkin because that's all there is on them, the Hearthguard have the decoration in odd places, and they're for some reason going for animal designs rather something to do with the Votann. Whether you like the Nordic Dwarf stuff or not, I don't see how what they're doing with it is done well at all.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
Well, if GW is going to steal from someone, I'd rather it be Blizzard. Seriously, sod those people and their company. If they have a problem with it, let them pursue the matter in court - what benefit is there to any of us to advocate for them pro-bono.

Also, thank you everybody for living up to my prediction

I think most of our disappointment comes from GW's design being uncreative, not from wanting to defend Blizzard's IP, an indeed gak company.

derpherp wrote:
Too generic sci-fi or not dwarfy enough.

It's fair criticism, but had they leaned into less generic sci-fi and more dwarfy there would be people calling them hacks for lazy dwarf tropes so I don't think this is a battle that can be perfectly won. Someone wont like it no matter what they do.

'Generic sci-fi' and 'stereotypical fantasy dwarfs' aren't exactly the only aesthetic choices they could have taken. I mean, we're talking about a faction that in its original incarnation had biker themes, and GW decided to drop it because it wasn't distinctive enough. Now they're coming back but without even that differentiation.

On top of that, the way the themes are implemented seems really clunky to me; like they've got these sleek rounded surfaces but then just dwarf glyph out of nowhere. I think you could make some recognizably dwarfy but not too flanderised designs, but my first thought on seeing the Einhyr was that I was looking at Starcraft Marines that someone had glued dwarf bits to.

GW's historically been pretty good about adding their own creative twists to established fantasy/sci-fi tropes, but so far I'm just not seeing that. The very on-the-nose naming scheme doesn't help either.

 catbarf wrote:

derpherp wrote:
Too generic sci-fi or not dwarfy enough.

It's fair criticism, but had they leaned into less generic sci-fi and more dwarfy there would be people calling them hacks for lazy dwarf tropes so I don't think this is a battle that can be perfectly won. Someone wont like it no matter what they do.

'Generic sci-fi' and 'stereotypical fantasy dwarfs' aren't exactly the only aesthetic choices they could have taken. I mean, we're talking about a faction that in its original incarnation had biker themes, and GW decided to drop it because it wasn't distinctive enough. Now they're coming back but without even that differentiation.

On top of that, the way the themes are implemented seems really clunky to me; like they've got these sleek rounded surfaces but then just dwarf glyph out of nowhere. I think you could make some recognizably dwarfy but not too flanderised designs, but my first thought on seeing the Einhyr was that I was looking at Starcraft Marines that someone had glued dwarf bits to.

GW's historically been pretty good about adding their own creative twists to established fantasy/sci-fi tropes, but so far I'm just not seeing that. The very on-the-nose naming scheme doesn't help either.

Out of curiosity, are there any other sci-fi Dwarf miniatures that do it well? I've seen people dislike Mantics ForgeFathers for some reason but I'm not sure what else there is, other than the Hardcore Miniatures update on the original Squats which are pretty cool.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Out of curiosity, are there any other sci-fi Dwarf miniatures that do it well? I've seen people dislike Mantics ForgeFathers for some reason but I'm not sure what else there is, other than the Hardcore Miniatures update on the original Squats which are pretty cool.

IMO the only crime ForgeFathers are guilty of is being Mantic, if identical models were released by GW the same people would gobble them up. They certainly overlay a mild classic dwarf aesthetic over utilitarian power armour a lot better than Votann do.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

derpherp wrote:
Too generic sci-fi or not dwarfy enough.

It's fair criticism, but had they leaned into less generic sci-fi and more dwarfy there would be people calling them hacks for lazy dwarf tropes so I don't think this is a battle that can be perfectly won. Someone wont like it no matter what they do.

'Generic sci-fi' and 'stereotypical fantasy dwarfs' aren't exactly the only aesthetic choices they could have taken. I mean, we're talking about a faction that in its original incarnation had biker themes, and GW decided to drop it because it wasn't distinctive enough. Now they're coming back but without even that differentiation.

On top of that, the way the themes are implemented seems really clunky to me; like they've got these sleek rounded surfaces but then just dwarf glyph out of nowhere. I think you could make some recognizably dwarfy but not too flanderised designs, but my first thought on seeing the Einhyr was that I was looking at Starcraft Marines that someone had glued dwarf bits to.

GW's historically been pretty good about adding their own creative twists to established fantasy/sci-fi tropes, but so far I'm just not seeing that. The very on-the-nose naming scheme doesn't help either.

Out of curiosity, are there any other sci-fi Dwarf miniatures that do it well? I've seen people dislike Mantics ForgeFathers for some reason but I'm not sure what else there is, other than the Hardcore Miniatures update on the original Squats which are pretty cool.

Would WGA's Einherjar count? They're certainly much less high-tech than some others, more closer to the level of your Imperial Guard infantry.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Out of curiosity, are there any other sci-fi Dwarf miniatures that do it well? I've seen people dislike Mantics ForgeFathers for some reason but I'm not sure what else there is, other than the Hardcore Miniatures update on the original Squats which are pretty cool.

IMO the only crime ForgeFathers are guilty of is being Mantic, if identical models were released by GW the same people would gobble them up. They certainly overlay a mild classic dwarf aesthetic over utilitarian power armour a lot better than Votann do.

Looking at them more, I don't feel like they're that bad really. The angular, sharp, flat style to them feels like a better direction for Space Dwarfs.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

I think most of our disappointment comes from GW's design being uncreative, not from wanting to defend Blizzard's IP, an indeed gak company.

I really can't tell, I'm afraid. For me everything GW has released over the past decade at least has been varying degrees of garbage from a creative standpoint. Some of it's well executed technically, like the Spartan, but I'd never call any of it creative. "Oh look, it's a Primaris version of ____. Oh great, it's yet another goofy ork vehicle with an obvious Mad Max homage." and so on.

 Siygess wrote:
I love the irony of a set of miniatures from GW that I could use as proxies for Mantic minis. Oh, how the tables have turned!

Looking forward to using these in Deadzone!

First thing I thought after seeing the reveal. The second thing was to wonder where I stored my Enforcers in Peacekeeper armor.

M.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Out of curiosity, are there any other sci-fi Dwarf miniatures that do it well? I've seen people dislike Mantics ForgeFathers for some reason but I'm not sure what else there is, other than the Hardcore Miniatures update on the original Squats which are pretty cool.

IMO the only crime ForgeFathers are guilty of is being Mantic, if identical models were released by GW the same people would gobble them up. They certainly overlay a mild classic dwarf aesthetic over utilitarian power armour a lot better than Votann do.

The Warhammer community is utterly ruthless and blood thirsty lmao. if GW released the forgefathers they would get absolutely slaughtered for lazy design.

derpherp wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Out of curiosity, are there any other sci-fi Dwarf miniatures that do it well? I've seen people dislike Mantics ForgeFathers for some reason but I'm not sure what else there is, other than the Hardcore Miniatures update on the original Squats which are pretty cool.

IMO the only crime ForgeFathers are guilty of is being Mantic, if identical models were released by GW the same people would gobble them up. They certainly overlay a mild classic dwarf aesthetic over utilitarian power armour a lot better than Votann do.

What are you talking about? The Warhammer community is utterly ruthless and blood thirsty lmao. if GW released the forgefathers they would get absolutely slaughtered for lazy design.

And then they'd buy five boxes

And then they'd buy five boxes

At least you admit they would get slaughtered.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:


Except those "lazy dwarf tropes" are what makes Dwarfs what they are. Acting as if the Leagues don't still have those typical Dwarf tropes seems to be completely missing what they are; they fit the Dwarf archetype with being short stoic hardy master craftsmen and miners with an importance on their culture, history, heritage, the Votann / Ancestors, enjoying beer, disliking elves, and the aesthetics of beards, runes, picks/axes, geometric patterns, the Dwarf-head as their faction icon and even incorporating that in their architecture to the point they have walls that are that design.

It's about wanting the miniatures to reflect that lore and what they are meant to be. For them to be a unique but still noticably Dwarfy take on the Dwarf Archetype in the same way as the Kharadron Overlords. The Dwarf theming needs to implemented throughout to show that side of their lore but so far it's on them in a way that feels jarring and like a complete afterthought that hasn't been done in a proper way.

There are plenty of way that could have made their designs more interesting without going too far either way. The options aren't mutually exclusive between "generic sci-fi" or "Too much Dwarf", you know.

If this was instead the Eldar you'd get the same sort of people who don't want a new Dwarf army to be Dwarfs going "You just want the Eldar to be Fantasy Elfs in Space, Boring!". Appealing to people who are against the idea in the first place at the expense of what they are isn't a good move.

I'm sure part of the community would absolutely love more dwarfiness on the basic soldier's unit armour, but another part of the community is just going to gak all over it. In another timeline that would literally be happening in this thread. There would be people like you in here calling it tacky, or like a mcdonalds toy, or lazily leaning too hard on dwarfyness or calling it copying Mantic designs, even if the dwarfiness was relatively subtle.

You know full well how the Warhammer community is, this would be absolutely no different.

And yes that includes your exact idea of dwarfiness. I saw you complimenting the Mantic Forge Fathers lol, there are bucket loads of people who utterly haaaaaaate that look. And yes it would also include the low tech biker asesthetic.

There is no world in which GW can perfectly win this battle and make everyone happy.

"For them to be a unique but still noticably Dwarfy take on the Dwarf Archetype in the same way as the Kharadron Overlords."

Man, the Kharadron Overlord are one of the most controversial lines GW have ever put out in Age of Sigmar, they regularly get called out of place and pure steam punk cringe. This is the worst example ever to use as an example of something that would "win".


In any case, even if we dont agree with how the subtle dwarfiness was pulled off on the canon fodder units, you do seem to agree with me that the more important a unit is the more dwarfy it is from what we have seen so far, and that named characters might end up very dwarfy like that one concept art peice with the gold armour.

I think if it does turn out that way then that it is a fine enough compromise.

derpherp wrote:

And then they'd buy five boxes

At least you admit they would get slaughtered.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:


Except those "lazy dwarf tropes" are what makes Dwarfs what they are. Acting as if the Leagues don't still have those typical Dwarf tropes seems to be completely missing what they are; they fit the Dwarf archetype with being short stoic hardy master craftsmen and miners with an importance on their culture, history, heritage, the Votann / Ancestors, enjoying beer, disliking elves, and the aesthetics of beards, runes, picks/axes, geometric patterns, the Dwarf-head as their faction icon and even incorporating that in their architecture to the point they have walls that are that design.

It's about wanting the miniatures to reflect that lore and what they are meant to be. For them to be a unique but still noticably Dwarfy take on the Dwarf Archetype in the same way as the Kharadron Overlords. The Dwarf theming needs to implemented throughout to show that side of their lore but so far it's on them in a way that feels jarring and like a complete afterthought that hasn't been done in a proper way.

There are plenty of way that could have made their designs more interesting without going too far either way. The options aren't mutually exclusive between "generic sci-fi" or "Too much Dwarf", you know.

If this was instead the Eldar you'd get the same sort of people who don't want a new Dwarf army to be Dwarfs going "You just want the Eldar to be Fantasy Elfs in Space, Boring!". Appealing to people who are against the idea in the first place at the expense of what they are isn't a good move.

I'm sure part of the community would absolutely love more dwarfiness on the basic soldier's unit armour, but another part of the community is just going to gak all over it. In another timeline that would literally be happening in this thread. There would be people like you in here calling it tacky, or like a mcdonalds toy, or lazily leaning too hard on dwarfyness or calling it copying Mantic designs, even if the dwarfiness was relatively subtle.

You know full well how the Warhammer community is, this would be absolutely no different.

And yes that includes your exact idea of dwarfiness. I saw you complimenting the Mantic Forge Fathers lol, there are bucket loads of people who utterly haaaaaaate that look. And yes it would also include the low tech biker asesthetic.

There is no world in which GW can perfectly win this battle and make everyone happy.

"For them to be a unique but still noticably Dwarfy take on the Dwarf Archetype in the same way as the Kharadron Overlords."

Man, the Kharadron Overlord are one of the most controversial lines GW have ever put out in Age of Sigmar, they regularly get called out of place and pure steam punk cringe. This is the worst example ever to use as an example of something that would "win".


In any case, even if we dont agree with how the subtle dwarfiness was pulled off on the canon fodder units, you do seem to agree with me that the more important a unit is the more dwarfy it is from what we have seen so far, and that named characters might end up very dwarfy like that one concept art peice with the gold armour.

I think if it does turn out that way then that it is a fine enough compromise.

Oh right, because the priority for an aesthetic for something based on the Dwarf archetype should be that it should be to make it cater to the people who don't like the Dwarf archetype in the first place, then. Can't have the people who don't like the characteristics of The Dwarfs be disappointed with the new Space Dwarfs!

I see that once again you've ended up completely missing the point with the comparison to Kharadron Overlords.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

derpherp wrote:
Too generic sci-fi or not dwarfy enough.

It's fair criticism, but had they leaned into less generic sci-fi and more dwarfy there would be people calling them hacks for lazy dwarf tropes so I don't think this is a battle that can be perfectly won. Someone wont like it no matter what they do.

'Generic sci-fi' and 'stereotypical fantasy dwarfs' aren't exactly the only aesthetic choices they could have taken. I mean, we're talking about a faction that in its original incarnation had biker themes, and GW decided to drop it because it wasn't distinctive enough. Now they're coming back but without even that differentiation.

On top of that, the way the themes are implemented seems really clunky to me; like they've got these sleek rounded surfaces but then just dwarf glyph out of nowhere. I think you could make some recognizably dwarfy but not too flanderised designs, but my first thought on seeing the Einhyr was that I was looking at Starcraft Marines that someone had glued dwarf bits to.

GW's historically been pretty good about adding their own creative twists to established fantasy/sci-fi tropes, but so far I'm just not seeing that. The very on-the-nose naming scheme doesn't help either.

Out of curiosity, are there any other sci-fi Dwarf miniatures that do it well? I've seen people dislike Mantics ForgeFathers for some reason but I'm not sure what else there is, other than the Hardcore Miniatures update on the original Squats which are pretty cool.

Would WGA's Einherjar count? They're certainly much less high-tech than some others, more closer to the level of your Imperial Guard infantry.

I have 48 of these guys standing by for Squats conversions. I was also able to snag several sprues of fantasy dwarf bits (not sure what variety) from the FLGS bits box. Fantasy dwarf heads, hammers, and axes will go a long way to making these guys look squat-like.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
Well, if GW is going to steal from someone, I'd rather it be Blizzard. Seriously, sod those people and their company. If they have a problem with it, let them pursue the matter in court - what benefit is there to any of us to advocate for them pro-bono.

If 10th edition starts allowing Command Points to be purchased via microtransactions in the Warhammer+ app I'm done.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:
Well, if GW is going to steal from someone, I'd rather it be Blizzard. Seriously, sod those people and their company. If they have a problem with it, let them pursue the matter in court - what benefit is there to any of us to advocate for them pro-bono.

If 10th edition starts allowing Command Points to be purchased via microtransactions in the Warhammer+ app I'm done.

That's the timeline where GW gets bought out by EA or Activision or Disney

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Based on the units that were shown off thus far, here's my prediction for how the Squats' main tank will look like. It's probably gonna be called something like Einhyrjyr Syige Thank and it'll be the bestest tank ever in the galaxy.

Do you predict that it will get +24" range and +3 Damage if it doesn't move in the movement phase?

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
I see that once again you've ended up completely missing the point with the comparison to Kharadron Overlords.

Ngl, I don't even know why you keep bothering interacting with him. Everything he is capable of is making dreadfully back point about stuff he literally don't know anything about.
It's like talking to a wall, but dumber.

One thing is certain, GW is dropping the ball on all side.
For the people that expected the space dwarf faction to be dwarvish, and for the people that ... for some very weird mental condition wanted them to NOT be dwarvish since they are doing the two at the same time.

If said it once and I'll say it again, the WHOLE point of the squat was "space dwarf" by intentionally going out of their way to not make them dwarvish GW is just doing what many out of touch corporations do, they are trying to leverage a brand recognition for sale while at the same time not wanting to respect what said brand is supposed to be about.

They should have went for Demiurge if they really didn't want to make dwarfs, go full on Alien with them and expand on the rather unique look of their Ship in Battle Fleet (hell, even the voice they used for that BFG Tau trailer just stole the show), it's a cool concept and one where they could have gone something really new rather than this weird fens riding where they are trying to bait everyone with the idea of the return of the squats while simultaneously CLEARLY not doing it.


It's as if when they decided to bring back the genestealer cult they made them instead a faction of telepathic slanderman with victorian steampunk look.
Literally nobody asked for that.

I find myself agreeing with Mentlegen. If GW are trying to appeal to the "Space dwarfs are boring!!!" crowd by doing something radical they've already lost, because those same people are never going to buy them in the first place (or will buy them no matter what, because GW diehards) because they're already tainted from the start by BEING space dwarfs. On the other hand there's a ready made audience who do want space dwarfs from the go, who they can only manage to alienate by moving away from that.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

Would WGA's Einherjar count? They're certainly much less high-tech than some others, more closer to the level of your Imperial Guard infantry.

It says a lot that the Einherjar look more dwarfy just because of the helmets, but if you took those away they're just short Imperial Guard but still come out looking more dwarfy than the terran marines we've seen so far.

If the Mantic Forgefathers were released with Games Workshop on the box the same people decrying them would be calling them the best, most inspired space dwarf models ever convinced.