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.

OverwatchCNC wrote:

Scottywan82 wrote:

Rymafyr wrote:

Scottywan82 wrote:How many of the damn thing do I need to buy to make one squad of Trueborn the way I want it, lol.

I'd say 4 boxes of warriors, only 1 of each special or upgrade weapon on the sprues from what I can see of the pics off the GW website. However, that's not taking into consideration making some GS molds to get the extra weapons needed.

How does one make a GS mold? Any links on that?

There is an article about GS press molds on the Capture and Control site on the "Hobby" page.

Thank you kindly!

iLLiTHiD wrote:
On the topic of model look and feel - whats people's opinions on Incubi/Archons?
The Incubi/Archons some people claim look too fantasy with the horns. Maybe a conversion job on the helmets, or even different heads altogether?

Overall, I like the Incubi less than the plastics minis. They are attractive models, but I think the horns are too overtly Chaos-y, and they don't seem to quite fit with the rest of the model range. Their big swords are cool, but some of the Incubi are posed in such a way that they almost seem to be struggling to lift them. If I bought any I'd want to replace those heads, or at least file the horns off.

The Archon is okay, but I would try and do my own using the various plastic components. I agree that the head without the horns is much, much better.

Very cool models. The specific weapon to body/arms though is a bit 1998 for GW. I thought we'd moved past that.

spireland wrote:Very cool models. The specific weapon to body/arms though is a bit 1998 for GW. I thought we'd moved past that.

It really is... I would think they'd move past that. I do see the reasoning for it though. How many ways does a normal troop hold a rifle anyways? Besides that, seperate arms to rifles makes things even more fiddly....I'm having flashbacks of putting 40 kroot together...ugh, the horror.

Rymafyr wrote:

spireland wrote:Very cool models. The specific weapon to body/arms though is a bit 1998 for GW. I thought we'd moved past that.

It really is... I would think they'd move past that. I do see the reasoning for it though. How many ways does a normal troop hold a rifle anyways? Besides that, seperate arms to rifles makes things even more fiddly....I'm having flashbacks of putting 40 kroot together...ugh, the horror.

I don't know, I like the spikey heads and horns. Then again I have a WoC army for fantasy so I am probably a little partial I think I am happiest about the Archon being plastic, I love the plastic Space Marine Captain set (and I'm excited over the rumors about a plastic Chaplain/Librarian kit in the future) I get tired of trying to convert metal ICs with plastic bits and greenstuff to make them look different from everyone else's.

I thought the Archon was specifically not plastic. They've just tried to make the metal models in the range compatible with the plastics by having similar arm/head connections.

Wiglaf wrote:What really cracks me up about the Incubi helmets are the spiky ears, not the horns (which, apart from being a bit ugly are not so out of place). I mean, sculpted ears over the real ears? what´s the point? Yeah, you are eldar, we get it.

I can't image search at work so can someone answer this?

Didn't the Samurai Masks have ears?

The intention is to give the illusion that it is not a mask, I believe. So having features like ears makes sense.
Plus it helps "sell" the look. Without the ears it is definitely a helmet. With, well it could be their head.
After all, mandrakes don't have mouths.

Howard A Treesong wrote:When they started releasing the multipart plastic regiment boxes they got ever more complex. The first of what I think of as the the more modern multipart plastics were fantasy chaos warriors and then skeletons, but later they did stuff like Empire, and for 40K Eldar guardians and the rest. They got ever more complicated until they released the Skaven regiment which was insane, each one had seperate legs, arms head and tail and that's before optional bits and the shield. And they were tiny. They were worth the effort, but they were a lot of work.

They've since re-released the skaven regiments and taken a somewhat backward step in making them less optional with fewer parts to create each figure. It looks like a fairly deliberate choice to me.

I like the old, 5E Empire state troops - solid legs, and nice bitz. The Eldar Guardians were insane: 2 legs, 2 arms, torso & head, 2 vanes = minimum 1 part per point, with extra bitz for more.

I think GW finally got a key part of the model right in their heads, which is for gaming. The separate legs & torso makes a 3-part assembly which makes for an inherently weak model foundation. Make the legs & torso a single strong part, and the unnecessary breakage from handling drops dramatically. It's a good compromise between the durability mono-pose and the customizability of multi-part models.

A lot of my stuff (Eldar, IG, SoB, Inq) is 1-piece metal from 2E, and I really like the weight and durability.

If I recall correctly, the legs on the 3rd ed. starter box were all 1-piece bits, although they included actual space marine sprues there, so things have, indeed, changed. But the point here is more along the lines of "Is is really so impossible for xenos to get single-piece legs anymore?"

Other than Orks, Tau, Necrons and Kroot?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

skrulnik wrote:

Wiglaf wrote:What really cracks me up about the Incubi helmets are the spiky ears, not the horns (which, apart from being a bit ugly are not so out of place). I mean, sculpted ears over the real ears? what´s the point? Yeah, you are eldar, we get it.

I can't image search at work so can someone answer this?

Didn't the Samurai Masks have ears?

The intention is to give the illusion that it is not a mask, I believe. So having features like ears makes sense.
Plus it helps "sell" the look. Without the ears it is definitely a helmet. With, well it could be their head.
After all, mandrakes don't have mouths.

Some samurai masks did, some didn't. They weren't all full face masks though and were part of a larger helmet. Ears were often present though, and were certainly present in japanese noh masks.

It's clearly meant to be a demon mask, I really don't get what people keep complaining about. "Eww, it has horns, but only Chaos have horns." I'm assuming these are amongst the same people that think nipples on BA embossed chest armour are gay. Because, you know...nipples.

Because I am old, the horn motif on the Dark Eldar figs make me think of old-timey D&D and the difference between demons & devils.

To me, the Dark Eldar are meant to be more like devils than daemons. Completely horrible and evil, but in a more regimented and disciplined way than the lunatic tentacle sex blargy-argy-argy of daemons.

In any case, the new Dark Eldar are definitely evil for the damage they're going to do to my wallet. BRING IT ON.

Going to want to get my hands on a Klaive or 2 for conversions sake.

man those look so bad ass...cant wait for the release! The older models should just be embarrased to even call themselves Dark eldar!

I like everything, especially the minimalist helmets on the jetbikes. Really sci-fi, but it might clash with the chaosy horns on the Incubi. I actually think the Archon could be used in a Chaos army no problem as a lithe and deadly slaanesh lord.

Dark Eldar deserve awesome models after the 15-year wait.

powerclaw wrote:

Dark Eldar deserve awesome models after the 15-year wait.

This is probably the most important point to be made about the range.

hubcap wrote:Completely horrible and evil, but in a more regimented and disciplined way than the lunatic tentacle sex blargy-argy-argy of daemons.

Yeah. that is going in my sig.

I really hate the look of the Incubi, there remind me to much of fanasty and there armor looks fanasty too... Im sticking with my old ones... I might incorparate the new swords into the older models, but Im disapointed in the Incubi and the Jets bikes.... I miss the spikes, and the riader looks like its out of Jedi... im looking too see if i can find a jabba and princess leia model small enough for it..... But i do like the codex as much as could read while having a hundred of people looking over my shoulder just to see the new army. I my self cant wait too model some whacks and grotestes again...

StarGate wrote: I miss the spikes

Chaos has plenty of them, you could shave some off a land raider or something

powerclaw wrote:I like everything, especially the minimalist helmets on the jetbikes. Really sci-fi, but it might clash with the chaosy horns on the Incubi. I actually think the Archon could be used in a Chaos army no problem as a lithe and deadly slaanesh lord.

Dark Eldar deserve awesome models after the 15-year wait.

It's 15 years now is it? It's bad enough when people complain about the "12 year wait" as though they've been expecting a full range re-do since the day DE first came out. Lets keep the hyperbole down to a dull roar shall we.

The old Incubi may have been amongst the best models in the old range but they look comical next to the new range.

plastictrees wrote:It's clearly meant to be a demon mask, I really don't get what people keep complaining about. "Eww, it has horns, but only Chaos have horns." I'm assuming these are amongst the same people that think nipples on BA embossed chest armour are gay. Because, you know...nipples.

Let's not go overboard and personally attack everyone who disagrees with you. I don't like the horns because I think they look silly. I can't imagine a case where the Imperial Guard commander is ordering his men to hold the line against an incoming squad of incubi. And his men are firm even against the prospect of being chopped to bits by filthy xenos with 4 ft long swords flying in on a skimmer decorated with the severed heads of their comrades. But then they see the helmets have horns, and everyone says that gak, and then they all flee for the hills. The incubi are already imposing models. They don't need to play a round of "who has the tallest hat" to be more scary. If they absolutely must have horns, I'd have preferred they be no more than half as long as they are, and be swept backward. Or possibly forward.

As it stands, the ideal defense against Incubi looks to be to build a bunker with a door that is only 5 feet tall.

plastictrees wrote:

powerclaw wrote:I like everything, especially the minimalist helmets on the jetbikes. Really sci-fi, but it might clash with the chaosy horns on the Incubi. I actually think the Archon could be used in a Chaos army no problem as a lithe and deadly slaanesh lord.

Dark Eldar deserve awesome models after the 15-year wait.

It's 15 years now is it?

It is. Codex: Eldar was released in 1994, almost exactly 15 years ago.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JOHIRA wrote: As it stands, the ideal defense against Incubi looks to be to build a bunker with a door that is only 5 feet tall.

LOL!

Thank goodness Guard Chimera doors are only 5 feet tall...

JohnHwangDD wrote:

plastictrees wrote:

powerclaw wrote:I like everything, especially the minimalist helmets on the jetbikes. Really sci-fi, but it might clash with the chaosy horns on the Incubi. I actually think the Archon could be used in a Chaos army no problem as a lithe and deadly slaanesh lord.

Dark Eldar deserve awesome models after the 15-year wait.

It's 15 years now is it?

It is. Codex: Eldar was released in 1994, almost exactly 15 years ago.

All those Eldar Exodite players must be getting really steamed at this point then.

skrulnik wrote:

Wiglaf wrote:What really cracks me up about the Incubi helmets are the spiky ears, not the horns (which, apart from being a bit ugly are not so out of place). I mean, sculpted ears over the real ears? what´s the point? Yeah, you are eldar, we get it.

I can't image search at work so can someone answer this?

Didn't the Samurai Masks have ears?

The intention is to give the illusion that it is not a mask, I believe. So having features like ears makes sense.
Plus it helps "sell" the look. Without the ears it is definitely a helmet. With, well it could be their head.
After all, mandrakes don't have mouths.

Yes, but Samurai are humans. Eldar aesthetics are about subtlety... and sculpted ears are unnecessary and a clumsy choice to insinuate their non human and sinister nature, imo. Instead of that I would have made the horns longer and narrower, more eldar-like to differentiate them more from chaosy ones.

OverwatchCNC wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:I am already in love with the ball and socket flying stands. I wonder if they will sell those as bits.

The socket part of the joint is actually built into the model itself so bits buying the two parts won't help you that much with converting them for other bikes unless you want to use the Reaver bike as a basis for your conversion.

Actually, I was thinking more of using them for Gargoyles. I've looked at Dremel kits before, and I seem to remember a grinder or sander head that might just work for making an indentation that is the same size as that ball. The old sort of flight stands with the skinny peg at the end are the worst thing GW has ever made.

Wiglaf wrote:


Yes, but Samurai are humans. Eldar aesthetics are about subtlety... and sculpted ears are unnecessary and a clumsy choice to insinuate their non human and sinister nature, imo. Instead of that I would have made the horns longer and narrower, more eldar-like to differentiate them more from chaosy ones.

Incubi Fare'elar: "Haha! Look at their clumsy human ears Mer'lyv!"
Incubi Mer'lyv: "Pardon?"

i've said it too much so im gonna say it again: the new incubi are not half as good as the old ones.

necrongod wrote:i've said it too much so im gonna say it again: the new incubi are not half as good as the old ones.

That is your opinion, and I certainly don't agree with it.

Imo those new Incubi are easily the best sculpts in the entire Dark Eldar range, both old and new.

I think it would be better if they had updated the old incubi rather than totally re-imagining them.

I'm 110% with you Phototoxin. They're no longer the same aspect warriors. Now they're just some mish-mash between a banshee and a scorpion. Even though that's all they were in the past too, the background they had to make them 'evil striking scorpions' was probably the best thing the old DE had going for them.

Now they may as well be some new aspect the Eldar came up with to worship demons and it fell out of favor during the fall.

They've effectively thrown out the whole Karrandras vs Arhra, Striking Scorpions vs Incubi angle. I mean why in the world was Arhra the original striking scorpion exarch? Nothing carried over between the 2.

Nvs wrote:I'm 110% with you Phototoxin. They're no longer the same aspect warriors. Now they're just some mish-mash between a banshee and a scorpion. Even though that's all they were in the past too, the background they had to make them 'evil striking scorpions' was probably the best thing the old DE had going for them.

Now they may as well be some new aspect the Eldar came up with to worship demons and it fell out of favor during the fall.

They've effectively thrown out the whole Karrandras vs Arhra, Striking Scorpions vs Incubi angle. I mean why in the world was Arhra the original striking scorpion exarch? Nothing carried over between the 2.

Except the heavy armor and brutal close-combat focus?

Oh you mean they don't have mandi-blasters?