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.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Don't make me separate you two!!!

The thread is speculative Kan. You cannot say either way that they definitely are or definitely aren't.

If Lietpold the Black--a new horse mounted character is not Finecast, I'd say it's pretty definitive they aren't.
If the Wight King Battle Standard Bearer is not Finecast--I'd say it's pretty definitive they aren't. Incidentally; I remembered that the banner with all its fiddly bits actually came on a 'sprue' structure rather than the normal pouring block bit.

It is certainly a change that they've gone from tabs to full blown sprues.

It's a change if they've gone from tabs to full blown sprues--but it's also not a sign that it's Finecast, wouldn't you agree?

The Death Korps stuff has been remastered within the past few months by and large. Lascannon Teams were unavailable for a short time back in July when according to Forge World, they(and the Heavy Bolter Teams, incidentally) were being remastered, and parts of the DKOK range are still being remastered(namely the Commissars. And yes, they are still being remastered and stock levels replenished. Hopefully, they'll be back before January).

IF I had to hazard a guess, what's going on is they're moving some of the things where they are predicting problems into a sprue rather than the normal pour block.

Love the injection port on the muzzle brake on the lascannon, good luck removing that without butchering it!

Kanluwen wrote:If Lietpold the Black--a new horse mounted character is not Finecast, I'd say it's pretty definitive they aren't.
If the Wight King Battle Standard Bearer is not Finecast--I'd say it's pretty definitive they aren't. Incidentally; I remembered that the banner with all its fiddly bits actually came on a 'sprue' structure rather than the normal pouring block bit.

None of that constitutes an actual argument Kan. There are a bunch of existing GW models that have yet to go over to Finecast, and who's to say they aren't testing it out on a few items before shifting production all the way across. Not every GW model went to Finecast the moment they changed, and a lot of models still aren't. Two newer models not being on sprues hardly constitutes evidence against them changing to Finecast.

It is not definitive. Stop trying to say that it is in your usual utterly intractable manner.

i see i see....

So when the majority of us call it "finecast"
kanluwen didn't perceive we meant the similar casting method.

Then what exactly does kanluwen perceive to whether something is considered finecast or not?
Just because its made by FW vs made by GW? ( one can argue you know they would have shared on the tech and experience )

no wonder kanluwen jumped to defend so fast
is it knee jerk panic that someone might lump FW with failcost?

You can relax kanluwen, we DONT EVEN KNOW whether the products are good or bad.
But y'know you might even be happy if it ends to be failcost method!
Why? because perhaps GW finally figured out how to improve the casting methods. Which IS a good news for all isnt it?

So calm down yes?

Down girl! You gonna get'cha self in trouble again.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Down girl! You gonna get'cha self in trouble again.

In theory i shouldn't be in trouble. Everything i said followed logic, and im not even mad at kan, i have accepted what type of person he is by now.

Now.... too bad Hasting77 doesn't post on dakka... dear god i can picture if he does xD

Ahhh i got it. Half of kanluwen's defense of finecast / failcost derived from the semantics of what we perceive to be considered as failcast.

My tomb stalker legs were on sort of sprues similar to that, and that was like a year ago.



I also saved those big ass triangular resin blocks that came with my model, until about 6 months after I built it, when I saw them still on the corner of my desk, and I was like... wtf am I saving these for? I'll never use them for anything. Pretty sure I then chucked them but it's possible I still have them in a bag somewhere, my 40k room is a mess.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:If Lietpold the Black--a new horse mounted character is not Finecast, I'd say it's pretty definitive they aren't.
If the Wight King Battle Standard Bearer is not Finecast--I'd say it's pretty definitive they aren't. Incidentally; I remembered that the banner with all its fiddly bits actually came on a 'sprue' structure rather than the normal pouring block bit.

None of that constitutes an actual argument Kan. There are a bunch of existing GW models that have yet to go over to Finecast, and who's to say they aren't testing it out on a few items before shifting production all the way across. Not every GW model went to Finecast the moment they changed, and a lot of models still aren't.

We would have had reports before now if it were actually Finecast. It seems more like one person is confused by the introduction of sprues.

Two newer models not being on sprues hardly constitutes evidence against them changing to Finecast.

You missed what I said, I guess.
Those models actually HAVE PARTS on sprues. They are not Finecast, however.
The horse for Lietpold was on sprue. The banner for the Wight Standard Bearer was as well.

It is not definitive. Stop trying to say that it is in your usual utterly intractable manner.

So what you're saying is that for some reason, only the fact that one individual is reporting "It's Finecast!" because it's on a sprue is more evidence than two separate models, both of which are brand new and have RESIN parts on sprues just like that?

Well. I can see this is going to be productive.

Kanluwen wrote:
So what you're saying is that for some reason, only the fact that one individual is reporting "It's Finecast!" because it's on a sprue is more evidence than two separate models, both of which are brand new and have RESIN parts on sprues just like that?

Well. I can see this is going to be productive.

Its too bad you didn't understand what i said, because from what you just said, i can see you really did miss the point.
So I'll ask again. To you, what IS finecast.

Can someone please call or email Forge World to put this to rest?

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Can someone please call or email Forge World to put this to rest?

Posted it on the Facebook page. I usually get a reply within 20 minutes, but they are not in the office yet so it'll be a bit.

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Can someone please call or email Forge World to put this to rest?

Im fine with the explanation of "different casts calls for different casting method"

Personally i can care less "what method" FW or GW use, i only care if they end up nice and proper.

LunaHound wrote:

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Can someone please call or email Forge World to put this to rest?

Im fine with the explanation of "different casts calls for different casting method"

Personally i can care less "what method" FW or GW use, i only care if they end up nice and proper.

You forgot "and without an increase in price"


GW themselves said finecast is cheaper that white metal, but is it cheaper than plain old resin?

LunaHound wrote:So I'll ask again. To you, what IS finecast.

Why would you mean anything other than the material type? Resin on sprues isn't new, and every time they hype the detail on finecast models, they'r enot talking about the sprue mounting being the cause of it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:GW themselves said finecast is cheaper that white metal, but is it cheaper than plain old resin?

The material is cheaper, production isn't. It requires more molds to be made and cycled into production more frequently and thus more people on the production line. What it did was cut GW free from a very unstable price for metals. Whether it required a price rise or they just slapped one on to be GW, well, speculate away.

-Loki- wrote:

LunaHound wrote:So I'll ask again. To you, what IS finecast.

Why would you mean anything other than the material type? Resin on sprues isn't new, and every time they hype the detail on finecast models, they'r enot talking about the sprue mounting being the cause of it.
.

Because sometimes Lexus owners get offended when we talk badly about the recalled Toyota

Finecast is a marketing term, it is NOT a production method.

Wow... so now all sprue casts are 'failcost' regardless of material. That makes... sense...? Especially since FW has been using sprues for a while.

Maybe if you need to make more stuff to manufacture outrage about, you should go post hate speech in the thread where GW posted a picture of a nerd picking his wedgie out of his buttcrack... (OMG! the horror!)

Whose raging in this thread? hasnt seen anyone mkelsch

The Grundel wrote:Finecast is a marketing term, it is NOT a production method.

Are you sure GW knows that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:So what you're saying is that for some reason, only the fact that one individual is reporting "It's Finecast!" because it's on a sprue is more evidence than two separate models, both of which are brand new and have RESIN parts on sprues just like that?

*bops Kan on the head*

Pay attention sunshine. We have a kit, previously not on a sprue, suddenly on a sprue. We have a whole range of metal models, made by the same company, that also suddenly went onto resin (plesin/whatever) sprues. Can the question (could it herald a change to Finecost?) not be a legitimate form of speculation?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

The Grundel wrote:Finecast is a marketing term, it is NOT a production method.

Are you sure GW knows that?

Yes, I'm sure they know how things work far better than you do.

Kanluwen wrote:So what you're saying is that for some reason, only the fact that one individual is reporting "It's Finecast!" because it's on a sprue is more evidence than two separate models, both of which are brand new and have RESIN parts on sprues just like that?

*bops Kan on the head*

Pay attention sunshine. We have a kit, previously not on a sprue, suddenly on a sprue.

Kan, sometimes it feels like you are so dead set on defending GW that you missed everything else.
Take a step back, relax, and re-read.

Kanluwen wrote:Yes, I'm sure they know how things work far better than you do.

You really have misplaced your sense of humour today, haven't you? Sheesh...

Kanluwen wrote:That's not what was happening here. There has been nothing besides the normal Finecast jokes, the usual tripe about "So we can expect moar miscasts?" etc.

Which, due to contractual obligations, you are required to defend against.

Kanluwen wrote:Why one thing and not another? No clue. Maybe they're trying to minimize lost or damaged parts by having the fiddly bits on sprues rather than tabs.

Wow! A bit of reasonable lateral thinking. You might not have a funny bone in your body, but you can occasionally come up with something that makes good sense. I'd agree with this assumption - to stop small bits from being broken.

I reckon the fact that thier on sprues now is does not warrent this kind of arguement.

Norn King wrote:I reckon the fact that thier on sprues now is does not warrent this kind of arguement.

No, but the argument was never about that.

It turned into " stop disliking what i like"

My sense of humour goes offline at 2300 EDT for maintenance. It doesn't come back up till 0700.

I have no contractual obligations outside of knowing what is and is not necessarily productive conversation.
Jokes is not, especially when the jokes in question are about as funny as catching something terminal.

I come up with plenty that makes good sense. Why just the other night when I talked with Forge World, I gave them an idea about a Sentinel with...
Well, can't tell you yet.

Off-topic, but can we please put a script in this site that autp-reports peopel who say "failcost" instead of Finecast? Most of it is just unfounded, regurgitates internet hate spawned by the few whiners whom don't have enough commone sense to realize that GW has-despite all their shortcomings-THE best product replacement services of any company I can think of. So many just glance over the silent majority, adn take the few whiners-the worst of the worst of the worst of the etc. etc.-as being representative of the whole.

Yeah! We really should have a system in place where those who disagree with my very narrow and specific point of view get instantly reported - no, BANNED - for even thinking about posting something contrary to my own viewpoint.

And GW has a good replacement service. Yay! Let's all cheer. The damn models shouldn't need replacing in the first place!

Kanluwen wrote:I come up with plenty that makes good sense. Why just the other night when I talked with Forge World, I gave them an idea about a Sentinel with...
Well, can't tell you yet.

hurricanebolters?
storm bolters?
assault canons?

Kepora wrote:Off-topic, but can we please put a script in this site that autp-reports peopel who say "failcost" instead of Finecast? Most of it is just unfounded, regurgitates internet hate spawned by the few whiners whom don't have enough commone sense to realize that GW has-despite all their shortcomings-THE best product replacement services of any company I can think of. So many just glance over the silent majority, adn take the few whiners-the worst of the worst of the worst of the etc. etc.-as being representative of the whole.

I dont know about you but if stores sells TV or a laptop with a hole on the screen, i think they'll be more than happy to replace it.
GW customer service is fair and just, as it should be.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah! We really should have a system in place where those who disagree with my very narrow and specific point of view get instantly reported - no, BANNED - for even thinking about posting something contrary to my own viewpoint.

That's not what he's saying.

Kanluwen wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah! We really should have a system in place where those who disagree with my very narrow and specific point of view get instantly reported - no, BANNED - for even thinking about posting something contrary to my own viewpoint.

That's not what he's saying.

Please do explain what he is saying.

Failcost is legimate term due to GW's product flop. To deny someone's opinion like that is to deny their right?
Whats the big deal? Oh because the fans dont like seeing it.

ignore button works wonders too ( see the mods are right )

@Kepora, you dont see people complaining about furrypiles on this forum... peace love and tolerate yes?
P.S I love your Graverobber, so lets not fight... hugs? :3