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.

Aduro wrote:And I can tell Legion beasts from `Nids at a glance, due to the unique details each line has.

Its not about 'telling them apart'

In my eyes Belphagor takes a lot of style cues from GW nids and still looks that way, to me, even after a few more views.

Whilst it is aesthetically fitting to the range I feel that it should have been executed differently.

fullheadofhair wrote:For someone who has a very deep dislike of PP and their crappy sculpting I really like this model - enought to actually buy it for painting. The one thing I will say is that is does seem to be a big mash up of existing models - hello 'nids and demonettes. That being said - I really do like this and will probably get it.

Just got into PP for their superior sculpting so I don't quite get this. I find new GW stuff cluttered and not a good idea for my OCD painting style of having every detail separated by a line of black. I have to agree that this looks GW-esq and so if you prefer their sculpting you'll love this. Not sure I want this model simply because the beast looks like it's bored. Maybe a sick pose on a terrained-up base? BTW, PP bases are so ace for actually balancing their huge metal monsters.

You went to PP because GW stuff looks cluttered? PP of all companies?

Conceptually (the melding with the magnets) this thing is brilliant. But the execution leaves me flat. The snake tail and big heavy torso look completely wrong, and the beasties head is all shades of boring. How does it fight, exactly?

That looks awesome, can't wait.

Mr. Burning wrote:

Personally, and this is only a personal opinion that I am sharing, If my first opinion of this mini was 'thats a nid' then in my eyes then the sculpter has failed to convey something unique with a generic style.

Bulky over lapping plates and ridges? is that really the only way to do things?

Maybe I have not been as thoroughly indoctrinated into PP's universe as I have been with GW in the past but first looks and second glances do count.

Contrary to popular myth GW ISN't the center of the gaming universe for all players.

I know PP/WM players who have never played GW games and if you stated "this model looks like a tyranid", they would ask you what a tyranid is...

Your perception of models and and your first impression of them is not universal. Just because it reminds you (A GW fan) of a tyranid is largely irrelevant to many others who wouldn't even make that connection.

Not to mention as has already been stated: Just about every miniature GW releases is a concept stolen from some other recognizable source.

This game of comparing other people's models to GW's is a meaningless as it is ironic...

terribletrygon wrote:You went to PP because GW stuff looks cluttered? PP of all companies?

Its not that PP stuff is less cluttered, its that its better quality (deeper details = better for painting) and you don't need 100+ for an army. 15 models can easily be an army in PP and they will all be top-notch (with some exceptions). I almost died finishing 20 Dire Avengers which is about 1/5 or an army. Just me.

EDIT: Also, all-metal is good in some ways. On topic: This is not something I would throw out there as an exceptional PP sculpt. Need a better look at it in person but for now it's not on my to-buy list. For a truly awesome sculpt try the Farrow War Hog. I may not be 100% on the frankenstein stuff but its huge, it balances well, its assembles with 1 noticable gap, and the detail work is exceptional. This sucker takes an axe (or two) to 90% of GW's stuff.

Mr. Burning wrote:Personally, and this is only a personal opinion that I am sharing, If my first opinion of this mini was 'thats a nid' then in my eyes then the sculpter has failed to convey something unique with a generic style.

Bulky over lapping plates and ridges? is that really the only way to do things?

I know, right? GW really needs to stop making its dragons look like Tyranids. And Lizardmen. Where do they get off with their scales and plates and ridges? Can you say RIPOFF?

powerclaw wrote:For a truly awesome sculpt try the Farrow War Hog. ... its assembles with 1 noticable gap....

I just assembled 2. Went together like butter.
Where is this gap you speak of?

Just the one behind the head where the two halves of the mane meet. Needed a bit of GS. Thats it though.

Gap filling CA did that just fine on my two.