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.

To help you gauge the thickness of the legs.

Those legs are looking mighty thin.. Is it too late to change anything?

 Gallahad wrote:
Those legs are looking mighty thin.. Is it too late to change anything?

No, these were some prototypes to get the feel for the blend. It feels we have to adjust the model a tweak, but the legs are suited for the base at mind without compromising on the look. Injection molding was the intent for the centaur. Difference may be just a few mms on each part.

Some quick references for sizes and height. We need to fix the female shaman, to make it stand out more, and adjusting the size of the centaur after seeing the prototype painted up.

The pictures are useful, though a little bit dark.

A comparison with similar figures would possibly more useful here - some GW beastmen (ungors, gors and centigors) for example. Let's be honest, a lot of your potential customers will be looking at the range with a view to using them in WHFB/AOS collections, so getting the size and scale close to those will not harm your prospects.

My thoughts are that they are very slender at the moment. Not just the legs, but the figures as a whole. They lack presence, if that makes sense. I realise not everybody wants superhero beasts on steroids, but that is my honest opinion.

since they say

We need to fix the female shaman, to make it stand out more, and adjusting the size of the centaur after seeing the prototype painted up.

it's going to be premature to show anything with another companies minis in the shot (as once the pics are on the net they're not going to go away even after changes are made)

Ooh they look awesome in the flesh, nice to see that the fur looks good once it is out of a render and painted up.

I really like the slender proportions, makes them look fast and agile. I just went back and checked out the GW ungors and wow they look bad compared to your stuff.

Thinking I may need a couple of satyrs now as well, those guys are scary!

 Huginn wrote:
The pictures are useful, though a little bit dark.

A comparison with similar figures would possibly more useful here - some GW beastmen (ungors, gors and centigors) for example. Let's be honest, a lot of your potential customers will be looking at the range with a view to using them in WHFB/AOS collections, so getting the size and scale close to those will not harm your prospects.

My thoughts are that they are very slender at the moment. Not just the legs, but the figures as a whole. They lack presence, if that makes sense. I realise not everybody wants superhero beasts on steroids, but that is my honest opinion.

There is an option to potentially bring them out or forward, expand etc with the software, going to have to bug Tim about it. He knows more on the technicalities about it. Its ok to be slender, but it has to be minded to what people have in their kits.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
since they say

We need to fix the female shaman, to make it stand out more, and adjusting the size of the centaur after seeing the prototype painted up.

it's going to be premature to show anything with another companies minis in the shot (as once the pics are on the net they're not going to go away even after changes are made)

Why you make sure it gets highlighted on the kickstarter page down the road. We do so many small updates on our progress, its more of a what we're going through process. Not all of it is glamorous or easy. Just another thing to solve . Also, the spartans, I believe represent the 28mm average of the miniature realm we were trying to keep within a comparable range. They were meant to be a mock photo opponent, and gives people the idea of size comparison.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
since they say

We need to fix the female shaman, to make it stand out more, and adjusting the size of the centaur after seeing the prototype painted up.

it's going to be premature to show anything with another companies minis in the shot (as once the pics are on the net they're not going to go away even after changes are made)

People have been asking how the models compare for a while, thought this would be a logical step. We have been effectively showing what we have been working on our page, and changing and editing for the purposes of making the models better. Ultimately, we would like to have a final data sheet to describe what is entailed for the release before the kickstarter starts.

rgdgaming wrote:
Also, the spartans, I believe represent the 28mm average of the miniature realm we were trying to keep within a comparable range. They were meant to be a mock photo opponent, and gives people the idea of size comparison.

So you are aiming at true 28mm rather than the more heroic sized GW stuff (30-32mm?). You are aiming to be compatible with the typical historical scale figure? And thus noticeably smaller than typical fantasy ranges?

Hope that works out for you. For me, with a vast collection of fantasy stuff in the more conventional scale (ie 30-35mm), I fear your figures will look miniscule.

I really do think that at some stage you need to post comparison shots with more typical fantasy figures, given you are producing fantasy figures. The sooner the better I would have thought, when you are still prototyping, rather than wait until a time later in the dev stage when it's more difficult to change this kind of thing.

I hope this is read as intended, as (hopefully helpful) constructive critique.

While I do not see the need for these to scale with current GW stuff (and I am happy they do not), I do like it when limbs and weapons have as much thinckness as possible without straying into heroic scaling. Mainly for modelling purposes.

I have kitbashed 4 Viking Berserkers for Saga using a mix of Vitrix naked Celts and Gripping Beast Vikings. I love the sculpting of the Celts, but I really prefer the weapon and hand scaling of Gripping Beast. They are just nicer to work with.

So while I think the minis look good, I would hope that scaling is pushed to the limits of reasonable (like Gripping Beast).

So I agree and disagree with Huginn.

 Huginn wrote:

rgdgaming wrote:
Also, the spartans, I believe represent the 28mm average of the miniature realm we were trying to keep within a comparable range. They were meant to be a mock photo opponent, and gives people the idea of size comparison.

So you are aiming at true 28mm rather than the more heroic sized GW stuff (30-32mm?). You are aiming to be compatible with the typical historical scale figure? And thus noticeably smaller than typical fantasy ranges?

Hope that works out for you. For me, with a vast collection of fantasy stuff in the more conventional scale (ie 30-35mm), I fear your figures will look miniscule.

I really do think that at some stage you need to post comparison shots with more typical fantasy figures, given you are producing fantasy figures. The sooner the better I would have thought, when you are still prototyping, rather than wait until a time later in the dev stage when it's more difficult to change this kind of thing.

I hope this is read as intended, as (hopefully helpful) constructive critique.

I agree with Huginn, please make these scale with fantasy figures and make the weapon shafts nice and thick. Like Stygian Beach said, Gripping Beast weapons are the thinnest the weapons should be.

Legs look like normal horse legs to me.

Agreed on preferring these in fantasy heroic scale.

 Huginn wrote:

rgdgaming wrote:
Also, the spartans, I believe represent the 28mm average of the miniature realm we were trying to keep within a comparable range. They were meant to be a mock photo opponent, and gives people the idea of size comparison.

So you are aiming at true 28mm rather than the more heroic sized GW stuff (30-32mm?). You are aiming to be compatible with the typical historical scale figure? And thus noticeably smaller than typical fantasy ranges?

Hope that works out for you. For me, with a vast collection of fantasy stuff in the more conventional scale (ie 30-35mm), I fear your figures will look miniscule.

I really do think that at some stage you need to post comparison shots with more typical fantasy figures, given you are producing fantasy figures. The sooner the better I would have thought, when you are still prototyping, rather than wait until a time later in the dev stage when it's more difficult to change this kind of thing.

I hope this is read as intended, as (hopefully helpful) constructive critique.

Totally helps with criticism. Im all for it in the prototype phase. The models height are based on 32mm models, mainly to compensate for the lack of bulk. The main reason is that if we go 28mm, the shrinkage effect of material will bring it down (might lose 10%), so going 32 brings us closer to 28. With the original faun, 32mm made it stand well with skaven, a nearly par figure for a human size, and his proportions still reflected the sculpt while keeping his presence. We are going back and forth to find the sweet money spot between look and scale.

The reason for the 28mm model is that the customer base we focus on uses a combination of fantasy and historical models. If you play Kings of War, WHFB is common. The other reason is that RPG model characters would be doable as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StygianBeach wrote:
While I do not see the need for these to scale with current GW stuff (and I am happy they do not), I do like it when limbs and weapons have as much thinckness as possible without straying into heroic scaling. Mainly for modelling purposes.

I have kitbashed 4 Viking Berserkers for Saga using a mix of Vitrix naked Celts and Gripping Beast Vikings. I love the sculpting of the Celts, but I really prefer the weapon and hand scaling of Gripping Beast. They are just nicer to work with.

So while I think the minis look good, I would hope that scaling is pushed to the limits of reasonable (like Gripping Beast).

So I agree and disagree with Huginn.

The articulation is closer to real weapons vs steroids. We had a traditional sculpting mind set, then have that going again with Tim Barry to make it come out that much more. These will rock.



Oh and below, take a peak at the new quiver. Had to reworked for line of draft.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Huginn wrote:

rgdgaming wrote:
Also, the spartans, I believe represent the 28mm average of the miniature realm we were trying to keep within a comparable range. They were meant to be a mock photo opponent, and gives people the idea of size comparison.

So you are aiming at true 28mm rather than the more heroic sized GW stuff (30-32mm?). You are aiming to be compatible with the typical historical scale figure? And thus noticeably smaller than typical fantasy ranges?

Hope that works out for you. For me, with a vast collection of fantasy stuff in the more conventional scale (ie 30-35mm), I fear your figures will look miniscule.

I really do think that at some stage you need to post comparison shots with more typical fantasy figures, given you are producing fantasy figures. The sooner the better I would have thought, when you are still prototyping, rather than wait until a time later in the dev stage when it's more difficult to change this kind of thing.

I hope this is read as intended, as (hopefully helpful) constructive critique.

Honestly, the main reason the size is coming up now is because of the horse. When we made that, it was about 75% of the way down when we were considering stretch goals. First sculptor bailed on it, our main sculptor took it, and brought it up to the next level. We had a set idea and it didnt really cross the mind until we started pairing torsos with the horse. What I saw were pictures of the horse and faun parts coming together, which looked good, so I left it at that. But the scaling I didnt double check caused in issue in prototyping that led us to revising the horse in tune with the faun torsos. It was intended as the second stretch goal for parts, so we acted with some liberty there. Now that we know the scale is an issue, im addressing it before the kickstarter backers have to deal with it. Which is mainly what we've been doing until now on our dime.

Yes, I am with the crowd that says please do not scale these to 35mm Melonhead Hamfists Games Workshop Fantasy scaling. I would much prefer them to be compatible with Pre 2007 GW and every other manufacturer on the planet, including Victrix and Warlord historicals.

90% of the time they'll be across the table from GW or Mantic figs tho, not historically accurate Mongols and whatnot.

The rear legs on the horned/archer centaur seem really odd and really don't sell the pose.

Maybe if they were extended further backwards to help sell the forward jumping movement?

Based on the weight, distribution, coolness factor, and modeling purposes, that angle was the best middle ground.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 judgedoug wrote:
Yes, I am with the crowd that says please do not scale these to 35mm Melonhead Hamfists Games Workshop Fantasy scaling. I would much prefer them to be compatible with Pre 2007 GW and every other manufacturer on the planet, including Victrix and Warlord historicals.

35mm is way too high.

Give us a bit, ill get more pics up.

Satyr mock up on 25mm bases.

They look excellent!

Man, I love how creepy those Satyr faces are. There is something really "uncanny valley" about them.

This is a tiny-nitpick just in the interest of being helpful, but I might suggest making the grooves around the eyeballs a little deeper, or making the eyeballs protrude a little bit more from the sockets. They look like they might be a little hard to paint currently.

All in all, they look fantastic.

I can pass that on to the sculptor. Getting 3d prints of those, and going to test out a pewter caster to see how it comes out. Everyone on the page wants to see them in plastic, so we are going to oblige.

Probably won’t change if I’d buy em or not, but I’m not a fan of the Zulu look to those latest renders. I get that other like them, but they’re not my cup of tea.

Valete,

JohnS

 cygnnus wrote:
Probably won’t change if I’d buy em or not, but I’m not a fan of the Zulu look to those latest renders. I get that other like them, but they’re not my cup of tea.

Valete,

JohnS

Honestly can do just about any quick fix melee item as is. Very easy to make new parts. Zulu weapons are really great for plastic line of draft.

Looking good.

More weapon options is always good.

I like how the Satyr have simple looking weapons, my ideal would be stone weapons for the Satyrs and Centaurs, but I am not sure if Stone weapons can look good in plastic.

 StygianBeach wrote:
Looking good.

More weapon options is always good.

I like how the Satyr have simple looking weapons, my ideal would be stone weapons for the Satyrs and Centaurs, but I am not sure if Stone weapons can look good in plastic.

Probably could do stone axes, but you'll have to get the imprint detail to make it stand out. Honestly, I dont know 100% of what can and can't be done. I usually just ask on limitations. What stone varieties were you thinking.

Looking good so far, RGD. Personally I like the Zulu aesthetic, though I wouldn't be adverse to a falx or seax version.

Aw man! Redwax! Really!

 inflatablefriend wrote:
Aw man! Redwax! Really!

Red wax?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ingtaer wrote:
Looking good so far, RGD. Personally I like the Zulu aesthetic, though I wouldn't be adverse to a falx or seax version.

We do need to make two more, at minimum, because the unit intention for these was for between 20-40. So some other weapons would be best served. But the way these guys are going, might as well make them a rabble band of fighters.

That works real well, are you going lead or resin? Want to keep the posing as similar as possible if so in either case, I imagine an extra/alternate arm on the repeats you showed should be practical and not too expensive? Or are you thinking chopping up the bodies as well? Don't want to add too many options and drag out the cost after all, as that's more money, more moulds and more time...