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.

Dude buys all the Titans, assembles and paints them...

... but can't be bothered to drill out the weapon barrels? WTF? Fail.

LOL yeah.

He could have just faked it and painted the inside of the barrel black, considering how much work goes into all those suckers!

 Talys wrote:
@Skink - I'm not so sure about that, though. After all, the Warlord Titan is the top best-seller on Forge World, and it's not like that is easy to fit... anywhere. Do people actually game with those?

Some people hang 1/24 planes from the ceiling, right?

Unless I'm mistaken the Warlord Titan is much more practical. It is 22" tall and it's taller than it is wide, so it probably fits within a circle of, what, 15" diameter? I think you might have a chance of fitting it in to a bunch of display units if you remove the shelf above it or on top if they have an open display area. You could put it in the corner of a desk and while it might be imposing you'll still be able to use the desk. The Manta on the other hand is 24" deep and 34" wide. It's just a huge footprint that I'm sure some people have been stopped from buying it as a display piece because it's too unwieldy for them to display.

It doesn't mean I don't think ANYONE bought it, obviously SOME people have bought it But the likes of Smaug and even a Warlord Titan are much more practical display pieces.

Yeah, some people hang 1/24 models from the ceiling, it doesn't really appeal to me though, 1/24 WW2 fighters are about ~20" wide and ~16" long but because of the way the wings are laid out you can stagger them to save space or fit smaller scale aircraft around them if you want (assuming you haven't done some scenic bases for them). A know several people who said they would have bought the 1/24 Mosquito right up until they discovered it's 20" deep and 27" wide 1/48 I think is a popular scale because it's large enough to have good detail but still small enough that you can display them on a scenic base in a realistic area (or several without scenic bases) without having a dedicated display room with large display cases,

1/48 also depends on the model..



Now, if only someone made a 1/48 scale B-52...

Yeah I was meaning fighter planes. 1/72 seems more popular for larger aircraft. 1/144 for extremely large aircraft.

I had a 1:72 B-52 at some point, fether was so big I had to hang it from the ceiling, though thankfully the creators thought about that and the kit came with several small holes in the wing and fuselage to loop your wire through.

From what I understand those 1/72 B52's were never all that popular due to their size, I remember someone commenting that they couldn't get aftermarket parts for that reason.

Funnily enough I think a 1/72 B52 is about the size of a Manta

The 1/48 B-29 is also a pretty large kit, I think it may be slightly larger than the 1/72 B52.

The big difference being that those kits are plastic, and spindly.

Versus the giant resin garbage can lid that is the Tau Manta. Could you imagine hanging that thing from drywall? At 28+ lbs, I'd be in terror of it falling down and killing someone.

The B52 was a big fether, 30" wing span, the hull was even longer than that.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
1/48 also depends on the model..



Now, if only someone made a 1/48 scale B-52...

I've got that kit.

There's a limited edition B1 B kit in 1/48 by Revell.

Very cool, KK

I recall seeing it at the shop, and thinking "wow, where would I put that?"

I kinda feel that there are rapidly diminishing returns when any physical dimension exceeds 2 feet.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Wait, isn't Oz a continent, as well as a country? And what about India?

India is huge population wise but (for an American) tiny geographically. SOmething like a billion people crammed into an area 1/3 the size of the US.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for how many people on Dakka have a Smaug...

Checking the Gallery finds 23 pictures tagged Smaug

http://www.dakkadakka.com/core/gallery-search.jsp?dq=smaug

All from one poster.

It's not scientific, not everyone posts pictures, not everyone uses the Dakka Gallery, not everyone tags their images, but it certainly indicates there's not a vast pool of people on Dakka psyked about their Smaug models.

@Kid_Kyoto - that made me think of the Warlord. Wow, there's a Warlord on a gaming table, in the Dakka Gallery

Look how big that is compared to the Fortress of Redemption, LOL. And how puny imperial knights look. And the baneblade. It looks like it could step on the baneblade haha. It's a nice photo for scale of the Castigator knights, too.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Very cool, KK

I recall seeing it at the shop, and thinking "wow, where would I put that?"

I kinda feel that there are rapidly diminishing returns when any physical dimension exceeds 2 feet.

Definitely. The modelling forums discussing the the B1 talk about keeping it in the garage.

Ship models do better by being basically linear, so they can easily be displayed on a mantlepiece or shelf.

The Hercules could be used as the centrepiece for some big display game of skirmish, special forces versus terrorists kind of scenario, but it's a very specialist application.

Does the Hercules come with an interior? If so, there are some neat scenarios to be played out with that.

Yes, a good one.

Here's a review, and pics.

http://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/it/kit_it_2643.shtml

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=italeri+hercules+1+48+review&espv=2&biw=1211&bih=683&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi-manMkJbKAhXEfhoKHTHADLgQsAQIHg

To be clear, this isn't by me. I just have the same kit.

Guys... :-)

I've got both the 1/72 B-52 (unbuilt) and the 1/48 B-29 as below:



The B-52 is the bigger kit, which is why it's still unbuilt - I can barely fit the B-29 on the top of my cabinets!

Tsk tsk, a mod driving a thread off topic, what have we come to?

Thread on historical model kits here:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/602556.page

Merely a slight tangent.

Ah most interesting one at that.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Tsk tsk, a mod driving a thread off topic, what have we come to?

Thread on historical model kits here:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/602556.page

It wasn't THAT off topic... we were discussing the relative sizes of models and the impact size might have on desirability of certain models. Thus relating to the most popular miniatures (or bigatures) made by FW and GW.

It would be off topic in the thread you linked because our discussion had nothing to do with using historic kits in 40k

I think we need Alphy and the other mods to weigh in on whether someone needs a couple lashes with a wet noodle...

Back on topic, if I were more of a LotR / Dragon fan, I could see myself buying the GW model. Thing is WETA sells a painted one for only 50% more:

For my money, you pay the extra bit for the WETA pre-paint. And it's not like the WETA model is small - it's nearly 12" high, with a 17" x 20" base.

Well, the entire tangent started off because of the Tau titan that most of us have never seen and its practicality. I do agree that, for most people, length and width are much greater impediments than height when determining the suitability of owning a large model, especially when a model has both both length and width (like a bomber, compared to a man-o-war).

Hence, the attraction of titans to companies like GW, I guess

I wonder if 40k will ever contain naval units? It would be kind of a cool game. Instead of infantry and air, you could have water-based models (and air), on a board set against blue instead of green/brown/grey. Imagine all the cool water terrain (floating fortresses, etc). Battles set on oceanic planets with big rigs designed to extract precious minerals and all that.

Kids today like robots more than boats. A lot more. And I don't blame them. GW makes good money selling robots, and I don't see them stopping.

 Talys wrote:
Well, the entire tangent started off because of the Tau titan that most of us have never seen and its practicality. I do agree that, for most people, length and width are much greater impediments than height when determining the suitability of owning a large model, especially when a model has both both length and width (like a bomber, compared to a man-o-war).

Hence, the attraction of titans to companies like GW, I guess

I wonder if 40k will ever contain naval units? It would be kind of a cool game. Instead of infantry and air, you could have water-based models (and air), on a board set against blue instead of green/brown/grey. Imagine all the cool water terrain (floating fortresses, etc). Battles set on oceanic planets with big rigs designed to extract precious minerals and all that.

I've proposed that as a joke example of what else is left for GW to stick into the game and spoil it even more.

If you think airplanes and tanks are big, you should have a look at boats. Even a fairly small boat is a surprisingly large thing, and naval weapons have surprisingly long ranges. The tiny Vietnam era Pibber was 32 feet long, compared to an M1 tank at 26 feet. Imagine what a torpedo boat or even a frigate would be like.

It would work fine in Epic, but not in 40k.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Kids today like robots more than boats. A lot more. And I don't blame them. GW makes good money selling robots, and I don't see them stopping.

Regardless, all this big model stuff, and I picked up an Imperial Knight Warden after work today.

So that's a +1 to the #2 item on the list, the #1 item for 40k proper.

Yes, it's a silly thing to have gotten. Yes, it encourages the whole "bigger is better" treadmill, but I've traded off the bulk of my GW to-do pile, and I got and built the Wraithknight last year. In context, I don't actually feel bad at all for having gotten the new Knight!

 Azreal13 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Wait, isn't Oz a continent, as well as a country? And what about India?

Nope. Australia is part of Australasia, sometimes called Oceana, and includes places like New Guinea etc, and India is a sub-continent.

Australia is a continent at least as much as the U.S. is. Unless you're counting Canada as part of the USA? Not that it matters for this discussion since the population is vastly smaller than the US with most of the population concentrated around several cities on the Eastern seaboard. Anyway, I don't have hard numbers, but local newsagents stocking magazines were a very common sight in most suburbs - even small ones, though that has declined with the rise of online, so while I saw the LotR SBIME magazine pretty much everywhere last decade, the magazine trade and even locations that sell them has declined markedly since then.

I wonder if 40k will ever contain naval units?

I had spitballed this as an idea when rumours of 7th started dropping. With 6th focusing on flyers my logic was , what could GW do to introduce a totally new mechanic and model range (aka flyers) for 7th.
Obviously didnt happen but an intriguing idea none the less
Would even allow them to release naval robg tiles and scenery etc.

The best use I heard for the Manta is using it as a game board.