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.

There is no excuse for finecast. Anyone trying to justify it is just...doing that, trying to justify it. It's a gak material, and is more expensive to boot. It's an atrocious product that GW should be ashamed of. GW screwed up and has been slowly backtracking from the product since it released.

I do own finecast, late production only. Among the best model I ever bought. However, I realize I shouldn't have said smooth, sorry, maybe soft it better ?
My bad
I mean, it wasn't as solid as plastic when I cut it to convert it, it was like bubble gum.

I think you shouldn't focus as much on the very first models, you can't sum up the whole range to a few weeks of production.
There was indeed so many sprue to clip ! But that's hardly an issue to my mind.

Well I hadn't realized people hate finecast not for the medium but for the fact they are old sculpt. That's a valid point !

Even late Finecast has problem of too much sprue junk. I have some resin models like Swooping Hawks and I spent hours cutting little pieces from all the difficult places like backs where in-between of wings would be or near armpits etc.

It's workable. I wouldn't say it lacks detail (for 10-20 whatever year old models lol). Plastic is better.

Finecast is junk... it just is. All of my finecast - bought from GW has been garbage..

2 ranger squads
1 reaper squad
Autarch on bike

All bought in the last 6 months, all terrible... there are miss shapen bits of detail everywhere. Chunks of resin where there shouldint be. The dark reapers particularly had solid chunk of resin behind the "loin cloth". I spent more time cleaning the models than painting..

Finecast is perfectly serviceable when you're using it for big chunky minis (Space Marines and the like), it's only when you try and use it for really skinny things like Eldar that you start to get excessive warping and general frailty.

Yeah, the swords on all of my Sslyth, and most of my Incubi and Mandrakes have long since broken their swords as well. Finecast is an absolutely horribly cheap form of resin and the worst part is that the armies least suited to the materiel tend to have more of it than most, namely the Eldar factions.

So, on the flip side of all of this, if you're a competitive player looking for just "game pieces that are WYSIWYG 100% GW models" and you want to buy secondhand, older edition Eldar metal aspect warriors are aces.

Metal models you can throw in fairly caustic stripping mediums and get the paint off without hurting the model at all, and they're often 50% or more off compared to new finecrap boxes. And, since the models are somewhat less detailed, they're super easy to speed paint or contrast paint and have them look good. I just bought 10x 2nd ed era fire dragons for 35$ on ebay (not even a steal, I just got them off Buy it Now) and fully painted four of them in 1.5 hours with contrast paints and gem paints.

the_scotsman wrote:
So, on the flip side of all of this, if you're a competitive player looking for just "game pieces that are WYSIWYG 100% GW models" and you want to buy secondhand, older edition Eldar metal aspect warriors are aces.

Metal models you can throw in fairly caustic stripping mediums and get the paint off without hurting the model at all, and they're often 50% or more off compared to new finecrap boxes. And, since the models are somewhat less detailed, they're super easy to speed paint or contrast paint and have them look good. I just bought 10x 2nd ed era fire dragons for 35$ on ebay (not even a steal, I just got them off Buy it Now) and fully painted four of them in 1.5 hours with contrast paints and gem paints.

Only the noncompetitive aspects are cheap on eBay as metal models. See Dark Reapers, Crimson Hunters and Shining Spears? You're paying through the nose because the secondary market reacts to the meta. Warp Spiders used to be expensive in 6th/7th with their jumping shenanigans. Rangers are in a similar vein of being pricey because of finecast driving the price of metals up and even older edition models are expensive because they're a good unit

Banshees, Scorpions and Dragons are all dirt cheap because they aren't good. Moral of the story: buy everything while they're cheap and then you have evergreen options

 Tyranid Horde wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
So, on the flip side of all of this, if you're a competitive player looking for just "game pieces that are WYSIWYG 100% GW models" and you want to buy secondhand, older edition Eldar metal aspect warriors are aces.

Metal models you can throw in fairly caustic stripping mediums and get the paint off without hurting the model at all, and they're often 50% or more off compared to new finecrap boxes. And, since the models are somewhat less detailed, they're super easy to speed paint or contrast paint and have them look good. I just bought 10x 2nd ed era fire dragons for 35$ on ebay (not even a steal, I just got them off Buy it Now) and fully painted four of them in 1.5 hours with contrast paints and gem paints.

Only the noncompetitive aspects are cheap on eBay as metal models. See Dark Reapers, Crimson Hunters and Shining Spears? You're paying through the nose because the secondary market reacts to the meta. Warp Spiders used to be expensive in 6th/7th with their jumping shenanigans. Rangers are in a similar vein of being pricey because of finecast driving the price of metals up and even older edition models are expensive because they're a good unit

Banshees, Scorpions and Dragons are all dirt cheap because they aren't good. Moral of the story: buy everything while they're cheap and then you have evergreen options

Dark Reapers: I see 5 for 30 with free shipping on Buy it Now right now. 41.25 from GW finecast. That's not bad, over 25% is better than what you can generally get from store discounts. I'm sure if I lurked for a week or so I could get 5 of the old rockethat reapers for 20-25$.

Shining Spears: The current kit IS the original kit. You can't buy an old version of them, an old version does not exist.

Crimson Hunters Come on, dude. I make a post about "buying old metal versions of aspect warriors" and you come back with "but muh crimson hunters." That's obviously not what I'm talking about.

Well, if you're going to discuss the competitive Eldar lists you ought to include the aspect that makes them the most competitive.

Shining spears were metal prior to finecast, and go for far more than wonky resin lances.

The Dark Reaper thing is an interesting case, when you consider they aren't at the levels they were with Ynnari Soulburst strats so they're on the decline in terms of price. But if you can get 25% off for brand new models, why would you go for a marginal saving on ones that will have to be stripped etc?

We're also in different parts of the world so the secondary market is different.

I've actually accepted Finecast as the replacement to metal (and by "accepted" I mean I just don't buy any, just like metal).
But what I find truly UNACCEPTABLE is that Finecast didn't end up being the stop-gap it was supposed to be. It was never supposed to be in production this long as plastic replacements were supposed to be out long ago (or at least should have been)

What really grinds my gears about it is the shear plethora of new plastic models that DIDN'T EXIST before Finecast while all the Finecast models remained that way.
GW should have been spending those design hours updated the existing range to plastic before adding to the bloat of other ranges (or adding completely new ranges*).

*Seriously, why did they release an entire FACTION of fish elves before updating CWE?

-

 Shadenuat wrote:
Even late Finecast has problem of too much sprue junk. I have some resin models like Swooping Hawks and I spent hours cutting little pieces from all the difficult places like backs where in-between of wings would be or near armpits etc.

It's workable. I wouldn't say it lacks detail (for 10-20 whatever year old models lol). Plastic is better.

On at least two occasions I've cut details of a model off because I thought it was the junk.

Fine cast has been some of the worst resin models i have ever had D:
Just do not get it, other than the company wanting people not to buy it.
I get mostly resin minis now days, And i not sure i have got anything quite so bad. With even the dodge china resin minis coming out better than my finecast ones.

But i think one of the reason AOS gets great support, is that GW really do not want to see what is there second flagship game to fail after they crashed it before hand.
So it gets some extra work to get it there, even if GW are doing what was fantasy worst issue with some of the 40k factions.
Really often i am interested in how they just get to some points.

Personally i think for CWE They need to look at the line and the craftworlds, and see what is really needed.
Since there is loads of design space within the craftworlds.
Dual Seer packs, make a generic seer, or a character.
Give each craftworld one and it would be awesome !
The aspects, all of them need a update.
Guardians, Please. I need a update for guardians so badly.

I mostly working with dark eldar bits for my dire avengers and guardians now, which is so much work.
3rd party for all my seers where i can.

The tanks all need a update, but they hold up well on the design.
I feel if they put the effort in, a wraith character could be good. It can be less a real character, but more a honor guard for a character.
When i sit back and think about it, i think Often GW is trying to reinvent CWE a bit, rather than looking at what they have and how they can update it.
We have not really seen a lack of interest over the years for Eldar, but its been such a ride that the players for them here seem to be very unenthusiastic about the faction due to the years.

 Galef wrote:
I've actually accepted Finecast as the replacement to metal (and by "accepted" I mean I just don't buy any, just like metal).
But what I find truly UNACCEPTABLE is that Finecast didn't end up being the stop-gap it was supposed to be. It was never supposed to be in production this long as plastic replacements were supposed to be out long ago (or at least should have been)

What really grinds my gears about it is the shear plethora of new plastic models that DIDN'T EXIST before Finecast while all the Finecast models remained that way.
GW should have been spending those design hours updated the existing range to plastic before adding to the bloat of other ranges (r adding completely new ranges*).

*Seriously, why did they release an entire FACTION of fish elves before updating CWE?

-

Solution: Use fish elves AS CWE!

Some of the Warlocks date back to Rogue Trader.

True. I believe that the old plastic jetbike used by Spears is also the oldest plastic model still in production.

Vyper and Falcon were released in 1997 (I still remember how exciting that was!).

I suspect that Aspects haven't been updated because it's a massive job and much of the range was updated in late 2006 with the release of the 4th ed codex which was a few years before Finecast and the full transition towards plastic. 2006 seems like a long time ago but consider that Craftworld Eldar have only had two relatively minor updates in that time.

The real issue here is that the range languished between 2006 and 2013 when GW was in full MOAR MAREENZ mode with only a minor model update (updated support batteries and Fire Prism) in 5th.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Galef wrote:
I've actually accepted Finecast as the replacement to metal (and by "accepted" I mean I just don't buy any, just like metal).
But what I find truly UNACCEPTABLE is that Finecast didn't end up being the stop-gap it was supposed to be. It was never supposed to be in production this long as plastic replacements were supposed to be out long ago (or at least should have been)

What really grinds my gears about it is the shear plethora of new plastic models that DIDN'T EXIST before Finecast while all the Finecast models remained that way.
GW should have been spending those design hours updated the existing range to plastic before adding to the bloat of other ranges (r adding completely new ranges*).

*Seriously, why did they release an entire FACTION of fish elves before updating CWE?

-

Solution: Use fish elves AS CWE!

Last week I was thinking about a Soulrender conversion

 Daba wrote:
Some of the Warlocks date back to Rogue Trader.

Yeah but they are ace models- I love the antler helmet one- I hope he makes a reappearance in a new warlock box [hopeing for a box rather than an individual kit].

The aspects where always going to be challenging - but I think their tech is so good now, and their model of kits size [I'm used to £25 for 5 elite models] works now. We really need proper spears- I hate those models, plus we can get fuller options for exarchs [which hopefully might spread out to autarchs through allowable kit bashing].

A big feck-off plastic avatar kit is also desperately needed [forgeworld is lovely but pricey and physically fragile and I think they could do him better in plastic now].

I really hope Banshees are the start of a serious revamp of eldar over the next year or so [there is too much to do all at once even just on terms of the aspects].

I would actuly prefer the Avatar to not be much bigger than it is now. Its a good size for what it is. Give it some weapons options to make it cool, But i would rather it be big in comparison to a human or marine, but not really huge.

It would be a lot better if Avatar was medium size and not much more than 200 points, but a good buffer, reasonable at fighting and maybe even could cast a spell from Runes of Battle. Eldar are expensive enough to not field 300+ points, 120$ bricks of plastic. Synergy is what it should be about.

To be honest, I love the Avatar from a conceptual level but I'm not sure he really belongs in most Eldar lists or that his rules should 'synergise' with other part of the list. He should be a close combat monster, first and foremost. I remember his nadir in 3rd edition when he cost 80pts - he was unbelievably good value and I took him nearly every game but on another level it was underwhelming. I remember opening the 2nd ed. Eldar codex in 1996 and drooling over the model and its stats. He wasn't really that useful because he could be taken out by a single twin linked lascannon but it didn't matter because in close combat he was the most powerful unit in the game short of a Bloodthirster. The Avatar was a psychological weapon for taunting your mates with the threat of the power you could unleash rather than the cold statistical reality.

Apple fox wrote:
I would actuly prefer the Avatar to not be much bigger than it is now. Its a good size for what it is. Give it some weapons options to make it cool, But i would rather it be big in comparison to a human or marine, but not really huge.

Hard disagree. I'm tired of Marines devaluing Xenos. The Avatar is a construct summoned to protect the Craftworld in times of absolute peril, and requires the sacrifice of an Exarch. The Avatar should be able to go toe to toe with a Primarch, and I want a model and rules that reflect that. I'd pay 300 points for an Avatar that truly did the business in CC, threw out wicked buffs, and had a 4++ or something. I don't want it to be OP but I want it to be SCARY.

 Daba wrote:
Some of the Warlocks date back to Rogue Trader.

There are two in production that I think are from 2nd edition, but I think all the RT ones have cycled OOP at the moment.

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
I would actuly prefer the Avatar to not be much bigger than it is now. Its a good size for what it is. Give it some weapons options to make it cool, But i would rather it be big in comparison to a human or marine, but not really huge.

Hard disagree. I'm tired of Marines devaluing Xenos. The Avatar is a construct summoned to protect the Craftworld in times of absolute peril, and requires the sacrifice of an Exarch. The Avatar should be able to go toe to toe with a Primarch, and I want a model and rules that reflect that. I'd pay 300 points for an Avatar that truly did the business in CC, threw out wicked buffs, and had a 4++ or something. I don't want it to be OP but I want it to be SCARY.

Source on the Young King needing to be (or even possibly being) an Exarch?

Bharring wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
I would actuly prefer the Avatar to not be much bigger than it is now. Its a good size for what it is. Give it some weapons options to make it cool, But i would rather it be big in comparison to a human or marine, but not really huge.

Hard disagree. I'm tired of Marines devaluing Xenos. The Avatar is a construct summoned to protect the Craftworld in times of absolute peril, and requires the sacrifice of an Exarch. The Avatar should be able to go toe to toe with a Primarch, and I want a model and rules that reflect that. I'd pay 300 points for an Avatar that truly did the business in CC, threw out wicked buffs, and had a 4++ or something. I don't want it to be OP but I want it to be SCARY.

Source on the Young King needing to be (or even possibly being) an Exarch?

https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Phoenix_Court_of_Khaine

Lexicanum was the first thing I found, but it's mentioned in several places, one of which being the Path of the Eldar series.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Daba wrote:
Some of the Warlocks date back to Rogue Trader.

There are two in production that I think are from 2nd edition, but I think all the RT ones have cycled OOP at the moment.

I believe so, and the Warlocks who really disappeared were those armed with laspistols, since those were no longer available in later editions...a silly reason to ditch a model, but it's a thing. This guy for example, never made the transition:



This guy was executed because of his choice of weaponry as well:



I think they also ditched the horned dude for some reason, he never made the cut:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Bharring wrote:

 Gene St. Ealer wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
I would actuly prefer the Avatar to not be much bigger than it is now. Its a good size for what it is. Give it some weapons options to make it cool, But i would rather it be big in comparison to a human or marine, but not really huge.

Hard disagree. I'm tired of Marines devaluing Xenos. The Avatar is a construct summoned to protect the Craftworld in times of absolute peril, and requires the sacrifice of an Exarch. The Avatar should be able to go toe to toe with a Primarch, and I want a model and rules that reflect that. I'd pay 300 points for an Avatar that truly did the business in CC, threw out wicked buffs, and had a 4++ or something. I don't want it to be OP but I want it to be SCARY.

Source on the Young King needing to be (or even possibly being) an Exarch?

https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Phoenix_Court_of_Khaine

Lexicanum was the first thing I found, but it's mentioned in several places, one of which being the Path of the Eldar series.

Based on the long argument News and Rumours had it can be an Aspect Warrior or an Exarch depending on the particular source.

The definitive Eldar history, basically the 2nd edition codex states it is an Aspect Warrior chosen by the Farseers. Now that doesn't really exclude an Exarch, though it would be doubtful, simply because an Exarch is slowly devoured by its suit. The Young King is presented to the Avatar naked, so...it kind of rules out Exarchs.

Any fan of the Eldar or any Eldar player period who hasn't read the 2nd edition Codex is basically missing out on the best written, most complete history of the race. It's the cornerstone upon which everything else was built (or later retconned for sales gimmicks). The quality of lore and writing in the early to mid 90's far surpasses the lore and writing of current books. The same can be said for the tremendous Chaos Codex from 2nd edition, etc. If you want fully encompassing, well written lore...that is your source. It never got any better.

As it's a symbolic role rather than a functional one, it makes more sense for the young king to be an aspect, regardless of how exarchs work.

It's imo another example of how the very well written and internally consistent 2nd Ed Eldar background has been contradicted. It was too complete and no one at GW has managed to add to it in a logical way that didn't conflict as a result. The autarch being the most egregious example...

What's wrong with the Autarch?