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.

Lord Harrab wrote:I find his use of BOLD

and

Strange sentence formating Inspiring!

....I understand his sentence formatting, HE IS WILLIAM-FETHING-SHATNER (seriously read it in captain Kirks voice and you will see what I mean)

Wardragoon wrote:

Lord Harrab wrote:I find his use of BOLD

and

Strange sentence formating Inspiring!

....I understand his sentence formatting, HE IS WILLIAM-FETHING-SHATNER (seriously read it in captain Kirks voice and you will see what I mean)

My God,

You

Are correct,

Lets form an

Away team

For
This Hazardous Mission.

but one of us

may not
make

it back alive.

Lord Harrab wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:

Lord Harrab wrote:I find his use of BOLD

and

Strange sentence formating Inspiring!

....I understand his sentence formatting, HE IS WILLIAM-FETHING-SHATNER (seriously read it in captain Kirks voice and you will see what I mean)

My God,

You

Are correct,

Lets form an

Away team

For
This Hazardous Mission.

but one of us

may not
make

it back alive.

....I am so not wearing a red shirt for this, hell red power armor may be bad ju-ju

Lord Harrab wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:

Lord Harrab wrote:I find his use of BOLD

and

Strange sentence formating Inspiring!

....I understand his sentence formatting, HE IS WILLIAM-FETHING-SHATNER (seriously read it in captain Kirks voice and you will see what I mean)

My God,

You

Are correct,

Lets form an

Away team

For
This Hazardous Mission.

but one of us

may not
make

it back alive.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Well played

swuk wrote:
Yes but if you look GW efforts are near identical to the real steel.

No they are not Near Identical, they are no where near near identical. At a glance they may look alike, but you will find that there are many design differences between the 40k vehicles and their inspirational counterparts.

Now if you want Near Identical take a look at the Catachan, Tallarn raiders, or Valhallan Ice Warriors IG regiments. Catachan dress darn near spot on for a Vietnam era US marine serving in combat during mid to late vietnam in addition to the Rambo movies, Tallarn have an uncanning resemblence to taliban soldiers during the gulf war, and Valhallans are almost spot on for ww2 era Russian soldiers.

A Rhino is not near identical to an M113 apc.
A Land Raider is not near identical to a brittish mk 5 ww1 tank.

The only one that is even close is the predator turret.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Toastedandy wrote:

Lord Harrab wrote:

Wardragoon wrote:

Lord Harrab wrote:I find his use of BOLD

and

Strange sentence formating Inspiring!

....I understand his sentence formatting, HE IS WILLIAM-FETHING-SHATNER (seriously read it in captain Kirks voice and you will see what I mean)

My God,

You

Are correct,

Lets form an

Away team

For
This Hazardous Mission.

but one of us

may not
make

it back alive.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Well played

Now that is full of win!!!

If you disagree with the original premise please argue that, not the posting style.

Firstly I would like to say I am very sad you are British.

Secondly:

swuk wrote:The ww1 tank is classed as steampunk

On which planet is this? There are certainly steampunk tanks out there, however the original WW1 tank is not steampunk, because shockingly, it does not use steam power and lacks many other of the design elements "traditionally" associated with steampunk.

like HGwells time machine or the Nautilus in 20,000 leagues under the sea. They are totally out of place with jetpacks.

I'm afraid you've got me there, I don't think I've ever seen jetpacks in steampunk before. But then I don't recall seeing too much steampunk in 40K, so I guess we are OK.

The space marine bikes look as if they come of a beech buggy or even worse , the latest craze for ultra fat wheels on shows like "bling my wheels"

Well, SM bikes are from a time before "pimp my ride" so I guess you could say they are trend setters! However, the entire point of SM bikes is that they can be used on any kind of terrain, so need big wheels to prevent them from bogging down

Take the space marine chain sword, that is 100% steam punk / mad max at odds with the blues and reds of stock marine colors.

Yes, because miniature fusion power plant/petrol engine/battery power pack is steampunk... Though I am not entirely certain what colour it is makes much of a difference...

You see , everything is fighting each other stylistically. A steam punk side would be cool to have

Not really, steampunk doesn't fit into the 40K universe

but a chrome flying saucer would look out of place in a steam punk army.

Depends if you made it steampunk

Finally I would like to say...

Kilkrazy wrote:If you disagree with the original premise please argue that, not the posting style.

*Cringes at undoubted modquisition smiting for this comment* But Kil....he is William Shatner someone has to point out the celeb in the crowd, all jack assery (note I am reffering to the horse-donkey hybrid)aside I think the fact that GW hasnt really claimed to be original buys them alot of leeway imo, as is the fact this is a game with overpriced plastic soldiers, so its hard to take seriously.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Besides who would mind being reffered to as the most identifiable star in the scifi genre, with the possible exception to sigourny weaver

“How do I stay so healthy and boyishly handsome? It's simple. I drink the blood of young runaways.”

Shatner is a complete legend

Kilkrazy wrote:If you disagree with the original premise please argue that, not the posting style.

No, no, no, no, no.

None of us are saying "Your posting style is silly, therefore your points are invalid". All we're saying is "Your posting style is silly". We're making fun of him, because quite frankly taking anything he's saying seriously is impossible.

You know I have to give mods some credit for having some sense of humor, otherwise we would be toasted so baddly by them by now (yes I just pulled a major grammar no-no, like the double negative just now)

Wardragoon wrote:Besides who would mind being reffered to as the most identifiable star in the scifi genre, with the possible exception to sigourny weaver

Yeah, I'm pretty sure Sigourney Weaver would object to being referred to as William Shatner...

anesthetic beauty

Is that on object or person who is so beautiful that one drifts into the arms of Morpheus by admiring it/them?

or

Do you mean Anaesthetic beauty, which is an oxymoron I think

Some illustrations of the works in question would help please. I am struggling to know what you are referring to tbh

Mate, if you don't like the aesthetic of 40k, then don't buy it. It's simple.

Ladies and gentlemen
please don't feed the trolls
they crap everywhere.


A Dakka public service announcement.

Does the OP have a point though? Nope, not at all.
I applaud the effort you put in to try and troll us, but the method was fail to begin with.

swuk wrote:
In general they lack all credibility & any sense of anesthetic beauty.

Yes, they certainly lack the beauty of morphine, don't they?

The greater sin is all this has been done on a planet which has such an exquisite natural world to draw upon , in addition we have a good selection from the last 650 million years as part of our heritage.

Ultramarines look like Space Romans, and no army in the world designs it's fighting units based on natural creatures, except for camouflage. You can't convince me a Challenger-II is meant to look like a beetle.

Sorry I thought the OP was referring to the artwork as in illustrations for packaging/marketing

Actually I tend to agree regarding SM's.
While not bad, they are not entirely to my tastes, certainly not the Star Wars Stormtroopers with flares look.

But to be fair some of the more flavoursome SM's are good imho
I also love the Puppet Wars back packs and steam helms.
The SM's can be altered with a scalpel and aftermarkets/GS if not entirely to taste.

But if everyone else loves the models that is all to the good too.

I hereby declare this thread...

EPIC WIN

Swuk, why are you on this forum? Why are you on any wargaming forum? Why are you complaining about something which you obviously know alot about and so must have collected alot of?

But, just in general:

What? Why?

I think that sums up this thread

coolyo294 wrote:Obvious troll is obvious.

This.

Next thing you know he will postulate that big boobed power armor chest plates make no sense.

swuk wrote:There are opinions and there are facts

It is tedious to look at ,

immature

repetitive

uninspired

...and these are the facts ,

First off if you don't like it why do you play and you obviously have no idea what a fact is, because that sir is most definately your opinion.

Okay, Swuk, here we go.

I try really hard to not be a d-bag on these forums. I try and preface my opinion with a qualifier showing that it is only an opinion and others may disagree. I try not to state facts as ironclad, often stating the possibility that I could be wrong or asking others for information contrary to the statements I've made. When I state something which is later shown to be wrong, I apologize and admit my mistake. I do not want people on these forums to think I am some trolling jerkwad, so I do my best to not get sucked into silly arguments.

But, seriously dude, what are you on about?

First off, I can barely understand what you're trying to say. I understand that you are trying to use big words to make yourself sound smart, but that only works in moderation. When you get excessive with it, you just come off sounding like a butthead. Secondly, the impact of the 'smart guy words' gets lost when your post is filled with more typos than lines. I'm not trying to make fun of you, just provide a pointer or two here.

Moving on, if you want to make a point and get people to agree with you, you should probably keep your point concise, so that your readers know what the issue at hand is. As it is, we don't know if you are harping on the poor cast of plastic models, the general lack of creativity in the design of all models, or the comparisons that can be drawn between many of the armies and other sources.

Let's handle them one at a time. At first I thought your issue was that you didn't like the design of the plastic models. I, personally, find most of the models to be gorgeous. Even the most bland Assault on Black Reach Space Marine still contains dozens of little intricate bits that just beg to be painted with a dizzying array of increasingly fine tip brushes. The plastic models I purchase are dynamically posable, or already in interesting and varied poses.

If your problem is the lack of creativity in the different model lines, I would point out that this is a wargame, and as such, the models should be mostly warriors of some stripe. There is going to be a certain degree of similarity. While I would love to see Games Workshop make figs for tiny scarecrows, fiddle players, athletes, Jehovah's Witnesses, apple trees, and pomeranian dogs, those things don't really have much of a place on the battlefield. I think Games Workshop has done an outstanding job in making the different armies stand out from one another. From the alien biology of the Tyranids to the austere imposing force of the Space Marines, all the way to the ramshackle, brutal Orks, every army has a unique feel to it. If you don't see that, then perhaps you aren't trying to.

Finally, of course Games Workshop is unoriginal. Unoriginality pays. World of Warcraft ripped off Everquest and made a billion dollars. Disney ripped off Kimba. Most fantasy games of the last dozen years have ripped off Gygax in a big way, which is fair because Gygax stole his entire setting from Tolkien, which is also fair because Tolkien stole it from various European mythologies. If you are uncomfortable with one idea inspiring and giving rise to another, you should take a hard look at your viewpoing, because you are unlikely to ever be happy.

And now that I think of it, aren't you kind of contradicting yourself? On the one hand, you claim that there is so much on Earth and in our literary and artistic community to draw inspiration from, and that Games Workshop is failing to do this. Then you turn right around and claim that they are basing their concepts on things from history and science fiction, and that you don't like it. Do you want them to be wholly original, or do you want them take inspiration from somewhere else?

I've noticed a bunch of questions from you on here recently Swuk, and I have to ask, have you just recently started building an army? Because I wonder if you've started to hit the wall, so to speak, in your quest to build/paint an army, and if this little tantrum is just your reaction to it?

Seriously, if you honestly believe everything you said in your first post, then why did you ever pick up this game to begin with? And why do you still play it? If you want out, many of us are scouring Ebay on a regular basis looking for good buys. If you've got some vehicles for a Space Marine list, I'd even be willing to help you myself.

Im pointing out in this thread what is " universally artistically wrong "with the plastic , what one could call " classic styling mistakes "

On the flip side there are a handful of miniatures from the range which have that undeniable It Factor & ive started a separate thread for that.

" Whats your favorite Miniature and why ? "
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/378694.page


Ref I've noticed a bunch of questions from you on here recently Swuk, and I have to ask, have you just recently started building an army? Because I wonder if you've started to hit the wall, so to speak, in your quest to build/paint an army, and if this little tantrum is just your reaction to it?

A Valid question. Ive been a fan of sci fi and of war gaming since i was a kid , that going back to the 70's. Warhammer never realy sucked me in , I visited the shops on many occasions. Instinctively i knew it had strengths and weaknesses. Nevertheless i did a quick bit of research and waded in. I have found that the deeper i get into it the more obvious the flaws are , and thus feel compelled to point them out. It is my strong belief that warhammer could be made much better. They haven't worked their product lines or system anywhere near as hard as they could. Sometimes they get close , but no cigar. My criticism is all about taking the game to the next level. A level is strongly feel is should have already reached a decade ago.

I want to walk into a GW shop " and be so inspired " as to empty my pockets at the till. A catlog of mistakes small and large prevent me from feeling that way. Ive already listed a few but there are many many more. I know that the better GW does in overcoming their errors , the more players will take up with and stick with the hobby. GW seems to be satisfied with bag ' o cheap tricks. In my opinion it should only be satisfied with awesome.

for some their mistakes may seem more invisible to you. The errors im pointing out are genuine clunkers , the kind that would get your wrist slapped by your tutor if you attended art or design school and not errors or opinion related to artist difference.

You mean, what do you find wrong with GW miniatures? Your point being that they are unoriginal and lack artistic flare?

Why couldn't you just say that to start with instead of irritating people with a bunch of poorly written and confusing bs?

Also, look up the difference between "aesthetic" and "anesthetic."
Might cause you less trouble in the forseeable future.

I can understand if you have a legitimate argument as to why the designs are uninspired, but so far I've just seen you say how bad the nids are and how uninspired 40k is. This is an argument. Its just trolling and its funny.

Ref

Also, look up the difference between "aesthetic" and "anesthetic." Might cause you less trouble in the forseeable future.

Im glad you appreciate that minor errors stand out like a sore thumb to the informed eye. ( yes my spelling is as bad as GW artistic errors ) Guilty as charged lol.
Had that spelling mistake made its way to the bookstore shelves & remained in subsequent re runs no doubt my readership would feel compelled to highlight small but irritating errors.
I am one man , typing on the tinternet & not an experienced team whose day job is to build the best they can.

I don't understand....

You have a human force set in a sci-fi/fantasy setting that is using armor and weaponry that resembles current stuff used in modern or historical settings. IG and the Astartes kind of show the next progression of mass produced military weapon for the future. I think the inspiration from historical periods/culture are more than welcome in a 40k setting. And you have to admit, they're really well done and carried through quite well with the whole force.

The only legitimate argument people can raise about 40k's background is how nothing has changed. GW, with their 25+ years working on the franchise, haven't moved the storyline along and it's a shame.

The artwork is also evolving and most of it's quite good. They have their highly stylistic artists like blanche that really capture that baroque and gothic feel. And they have their more modern artists which just do realistic and conceptualized pieces.