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.

I got into 40K with 2nd Edition. I love the look of Jes Goodwin’s sleek, consistent marines from the early 90’s. I used to think it would be cool if the marine models were all gothic-ed up, but now that they actually are I don’t care for it so much. I also don’t think the marines’ anatomy is as ‘believable’ as before (seems to have gotten squattier/more “heroic”). A good example is the chaplain with cybernetic face; the original seemed proportioned pretty normally; the new one looks kinda dwarfy. I still love the 2nd Ed "clones" from the box set (great test models).

Anyway, back on topic: the newer style includes not only more variable body proportions and more ornate/gothic decorations but also more variable equipment bits and armor details (on the metal models). One may have a certain grenade while another has a different one; this guy’s got a tabard while that guy has a gun holster and an incense thingy. That other dude has a completely different holster. Someone has a typical-looking aquila while this other guy's is completely different. And so on. It makes perfect sense for the marines to have all this diverse, often hand-crafter equipment and apparel, but since they are a militant order I guess I prefer them to look more uniform and consistent, like a contemporary military. So I gravitate to the old 90’s marines (and current plastics) so I can trick them out with more consistent bitz. Every time I buy a new metal I find some odd detail which I could do without. Maybe I’m just neurotic.

Anyone else prefer older or less-detailed miniatures for any reason?

Yes.

The pursuit of so-called "detail" is a driver of GW's scale creep problem and contributes to encrusting SM models in particular with more and more bits of crap.

They are supposed to be wargame figures, not Faberge eggs.

I like the clean look of Hasslefree and Copplestone figures. Infinity and MERCS are good examples of models with more detail which looks designed.

Quite a few GW models look like the designer swallowed a mugful of purity seals, skulls and fur, then jumped up and down until he vomited on to the master sculpt.

I'm with you. Personally, I make all my Marine units from plastic kits, and I make a point of not adding any of the little extras on - no more Purity Seals, grenades, holsters or combat knives than are on the base sculpt. Same goes for my Guard.

Partly this is because I prefer cleaner models in terms of cleannes of lines, etc, but also partly it's because I like working with very limited palettes and lots of little details make this difficult without the details kinda blending together.

Some of it seems so random and purposeless. My favorite (as in dumbest) are the plastic terminator legs with the purity seal - just the ribbon, not the wax - sticking out from under the left hip plate. Like a chaplain walked by before battle, lifted up the plate, and put a purity seal under there. Why? Why would you want, for that matter, so many purity seals on dudes' ankles, dragging along the ground? Would the chaplain really bend down and affix it to the guy's foot before battle?

There's an old 90's termie with a purity seal on his right chest, overlying the eagle. Awesome mini. "Here, brother, have a purity seal at actual arm height." Makes sense.

Raptor wrote:Some of it seems so random and purposeless. My favorite (as in dumbest) are the plastic terminator legs with the purity seal - just the ribbon, not the wax - sticking out from under the left hip plate. Like a chaplain walked by before battle, lifted up the plate, and put a purity seal under there. Why? Why would you want, for that matter, so many purity seals on dudes' ankles, dragging along the ground? Would the chaplain really bend down and affix it to the guy's foot before battle?

There's an old 90's termie with a purity seal on his right chest, overlying the eagle. Awesome mini. "Here, brother, have a purity seal at actual arm height." Makes sense.

I kind of agree, OP. While I do like characters to stand out, I prefer rank and file marines to look consistent.

Also about the purity seal thing - IIRC there one in the inside of the thigh (nearest to the crotch) of the kneeling legs for marines. What kind of perverted chaplain goes there? (refuses to make catholic priest joke)

Kilkrazy wrote:Yes.

The pursuit of so-called "detail" is a driver of GW's scale creep problem and contributes to encrusting SM models in particular with more and more bits of crap.

They are supposed to be wargame figures, not Faberge eggs.

I like the clean look of Hasslefree and Copplestone figures. Infinity and MERCS are good examples of models with more detail which looks designed.

Quite a few GW models look like the designer swallowed a mugful of purity seals, skulls and fur, then jumped up and down until he vomited on to the master sculpt.

I guess you've never seen 40k art, huh.

NoBaconz4 wrote:Also about the purity seal thing - IIRC there one in the inside of the thigh (nearest to the crotch) of the kneeling legs for marines. What kind of perverted chaplain goes there? (refuses to make catholic priest joke)

I'd forgotten about that but, yeah. Crazy. It took a while to scrape that one off and make it look perfect. It's like the sculptor sometimes isn't satisfied with the overall level of detail/decoration so he sticks a purity seal/skull/grenade in the most noticeable but least logical place possible.

Another pet peeve of mine are the ridgy-bony toes on some guys. Some Mk6 dudes had them originally, others not. When they show up randomly on newer figs (like the limboing terminator chaplain or that new LotD guy) I always cringe. "My armor is specially designed to hold dirt in my toe ridges! Why? Who knows!"

I completely disagree. If models every become like the art, full of such small intricate details, raised text, similar to scibor's stuff, I would love them. So much more interesting and better from a realism point of view.

I have to say it depends on the actual army.

For something that is very military-like. Then you want uniformity. Having served in the military you don't have the option to customize your uniform. The only thing that may be different are specific awards that you wear, something that goes with a dress uniform, not with a combat one.

Now orks on the other hand.......The more crazy odd detail, the better.

Kilkrazy wrote:Yes.

encrusting SM models in particular with more and more bits of crap.

purity seals, skulls and fur, then jumped up and down until he vomited on to the master sculpt.

I cant agree more. I use a good number of GW minis, but not with a GW system or GW universe, so I would really like the religious (purity seal) aspect toned down or moved to optional add on bits. Ditto for the fur. Dont like the fur at all.

Uh no, I like details on my models. You people are weird.

I like details on models, but also empty space to add freehand work. I really dislike the recent trend towards raised banners, I'd rather have those pieces left as a canvas. I'm not the best at painting banners, but I like being able to experiment and get better.

I think Jes's work on the new(ish) harlequins is the perfect blend of detail and blank. There was a lot of space to work on, adding diamond patterns and all, but there was also a nice amount of detail so that the models didn't look sparse.

Also about the purity seal thing - IIRC there one in the inside of the thigh (nearest to the crotch) of the kneeling legs for marines. What kind of perverted chaplain goes there? (refuses to make catholic priest joke)

There are references in the Old Testament (note the "testa") of swearing an oath by placing a hand 'under the person's "thigh" '.

And the servant put his hand under the thigh of Abraham his master, and sware to him concerning that matter.

genesis 24:9 there are other examples iirc

testis
(pl. testes), 1704, from L. testis "testicle," usually regarded as a special application of testis "witness" (see testament), presumably because it "bears witness" to virility (cf. Gk. parastates, lit. "one that stands by;" and Fr. slang témoins, lit. "witnesses").

Just what the Chaplain is attempting to witness I wouldn't like to say.

I like a lot of detail bits, but I hate detail modeled onto the model. This is speaking more as a modeller than a painter, too. With less detail, the model is more of a basic frame; all it adds to the mini is basic size and race. From there, you'd then be able to add all the frills, like armour, weapons, and even the posing would be easier if you didn't have to worry about carving away an armour plate and two grenades. Safer too.

I agree for the most part, look at Marneus Calgar, it looks like he got dipped in glue the dipped in a bitz box.

That being said, I like a little bit of detail. No two of my space marines are the same. They all follow a basic color scheme, but every one has an extra purity seal here, a tabard there. On one of my faves, I cut off the carapace of a termagant and used it as a shoulder pad.

The extra bits should tell a story, but GW is getting a little out of hand with the extra details.

I like my Marines to be pretty uniform and clean, and I think that is represented in my color scheme and unit choice.

However, I just picked up some FW Elysian Drop Troops and they are wonderfully detailed and cluttered. I've decided to put all the extra bitz on them and make them look like they're actually kitted out for grav-chuteing into hostile terrain and waging guerrilla warfare for several weeks before the real army arrives.

So I guess for me it boils down to army choice. If I ever had some Orks they'd be absolutely covered in glyphs and choppaz and dakka out the arse. Because that's an Orky motif (oooooh, boss, themz be big complikated wordz you got there!). But for now my Marines stay relatively unadorned.

I definitely love detail, especially on Space Marines. It would be different if it was IG or something, but space marines have all the time in the world to decorate their armour. They go into battle with splendor, and only their chapter colours are what they are bound to.

No two of my marines are exactly alike, even in poses. I go out of my way to re-pose marines that are similarly posed, even if it means lopping off a hand and green-stuffing it to re-arrange it xD.

There is detail ( confrontation minis )

and there is detail for the sake of bling bling ( GW )

anyone agree? disagree?

LunaHound wrote:There is detail ( confrontation minis )

and there is detail for the sake of bling bling ( GW )

anyone agree? disagree?

Semi-Agree. Bling-Bling, makes it sound like there's no purpose. There is definitely a purpose in the honour badges put on to units. But I don't think that GW should go putting on like, random trophies from other races, and 40 karot gold medallions hanging from the chaplains neck (Even if it is an Aquila XD)

Only details I have a problem with is stuff like the chapter banner from the sang guard box that has 'blood angels' written on it in raised letters and is at a terrible angle to cut off (using it for a successor).

I try to keep the uniform look of my marines. I even make sure the sergeants are helmeted and dont wear the banners.
But thats because theyre paranoid about enemy snipers mostly

I like detail on my models. However, for some years now I've only built and painted, not gamed.

It's looking like I will be able to get back into the gaming side of things now, which I am excited about. Given transporting and gaming fragility issues, I've found myself thinking of starting a new, more physically robust force, less likely to break on the tabletop. Probably plastic-heavy marines--so, not necessarily fewer details, but fewer 'fiddly' bits. I wonder whether many other people think like this.

I think I appreciate both kinds now.

I also had the 2nd edition box set when I was a kid, and I quickly came to despise the plastic clone troops in it. I used to hate how the marines were sculpted with their chin forced down into their chest. Not to mention their pose! It was a pose that I can only liken to the kind of pose a girl might adopt if she were to try and pee standing up.

I think part of the reason I hated them so much was because GW being what it is, and me being a broke kid at the time, I just wasn't able to afford many of the metal marines in the more dynamic poses. So I was stuck with the boring plastic ones.

Now looking back, I've actually grown quite fond of them. Perhaps it is a little because of nostalgia, but also I think I've come to appreciate their simplicity and functionality as 'game pieces'. I've also started to like the really old plastic Terminators from the original space hulk, which is funny because back in the day I couldn't wait to ditch those guys.

I still enjoy the more dynamic models though, and I usually don't hold back when it comes to embellishments. Some of my assault marines are hardly visible any more beneath the heaps of grenades and pouches I've glued on.

I do sometimes smirk about how much things have changed. When I was young all a marine would have to do to become a captain (apparently), was take his helmet off :p. Now of course you need all kinds of cloaks and skulls and fancy nipple armour just to lead a squad.

I appreciate older models to newer ones, but that's just because they're rarer. I still like all my models with details, and the new stuff is just beans really.

[quote=Smacks} fancy nipple armour just to lead a squad.

Smacks wrote:Now looking back, I've actually grown quite fond of them. Perhaps it is a little because of nostalgia, but also I think I've come to appreciate their simplicity and functionality as 'game pieces'. I've also started to like the really old plastic Terminators from the original space hulk, which is funny because back in the day I couldn't wait to ditch those guys.

Exactly. They're like old-school game pieces from a bygone era. And they paint up so easily. I went through a phase where I was buying them up whenever I saw a clean sprue on ebay; now I have, like, a hundred of the little guys.

Oh god, those old plastic terminators were the worst, with the clip on flamer! I must have 30 of those along with the old plastic grey knight terminators. I was so happy when I got my metal box.

That being said I love all my RTB01 marines. Simple, detailed, but not overly so. Some of the stuff now is so over the top and I think they use that to justify the prices.

There are a lot of the bits that I just don't have the time or dexterity to place, like bolt pistol holsters or ammo packs. I like the simplicity of the older pieces, too; I have a bunch of 2nd edition marines and genestealers. But some things, like purity seals, I enjoy placing on certain models to give them some flair, like my plasma cannon marine has about 5 purity seals on it. He's praying for no overheats! I'm also making a Company Veteran's storm shield to read Born to Kill with a purity seal with a peace symbol on it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andrew1975 wrote:Oh god, those old plastic terminators were the worst, with the clip on flamer! I must have 30 of those along with the old plastic grey knight terminators. I was so happy when I got my metal box.

Sorry, but I really like the old Space Hulk Terminators. They were the first 40K minis I ever saw, much less owned. I collect them whenever I can!

i dont usually add extra details to my models i enjoy just using the base kit, on a side note i like finecast way better then pewter except for the price increase

Andrew1975 wrote:Oh god, those old plastic terminators were the worst, with the clip on flamer!

Yes! those are the ones, the Storm Bolter just kind of melts into the body, and they lean forward at about a 40 degree angle lol. Though the worst marine sculpts IMO were the weird bug eyed Space Crusade marines. I'm super nostalgic about Space Crusade, but I still can't find any love for the pieces, they were just so awful.

I also really like the RTB01 marines, though I'm not sure why lol since they were technically even worse than the Space Crusade marines. Even the mouldings were bad, they have huge pits in their legs and stuff. Yet they still manage to have a certain charm about them that the others don't, maybe it's because they are modular, or because they look like cute little wombles.