Plastic Great Coat Guard - pictures at last!

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.

**syr8766**

Yep. I'll be getting a bunch of packs.

**Cane**

Yea I'll probably be pick up a pack or two to make some Conscripts; can't ever have enough of those!

**JohnHwangDD**

Vaktathi wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:Wow, the DKOK guy totally kicks ass by comparison. Not even close on quality.
It's ah, not supposed to be. One is resin model costing about $65 for a squad of 10, the other is plastic (and *still* a prototype) going to cost like $12 for 10.

Why should plastic be inherently worse than resin?

After all, we've already seen that the resin Thunderhawk is "better" than the metal one, and the plastic Valk is "better" than the resin one.

The sculpting design of the plastic model can be quite better - just look at the 1/35 Tamiya / Dragon figures in plastic.

**kestral**

I think your enjoyment of these figures will depend on if you take an individual figure or army approach. If you want figures that look nice individually, and you are going to lavish care on them, spend the extra $ and get something better. If your focus is having a complete army that looks a certain way (moon nazi or whatever) than figures like this are a great value. Great detail is only great if you're going to take the time to paint it - or its easily drybrushed.

**Polonius**

I'm interested in them only so far as I can use them to build my long considered "heavily armored short range human elite warrior" army that is as far from the metal Sisters of Battle as I can get.

**Neconilis**

Tailgunner wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:Scaled them so the base diameter is exactly the same. Looks like a decent match to me. The legs are a bit shorter.

That's very helpful. And it also demonstrates just how much better the FW models are - better detail, better sculpting and (perhaps most importantly) better designed - they're clearly based on WWI soldiers, but they combine the features of more than one army (essentially French and German), rather than being thinly disguised WWII Germans. Granted they're incredibly expensive, but you get what you pay for. GW's eventual plastic Guard will be cheaper than FW's (and less detailed) and more expensive than this prototype, but they'll be better. And thus worth paying more for.

In your (not so) humble opinion.

**Kronus VI**

Combine it with the forge world cadian upgrade = Win

**Savnock**

This level of detail (or lack thereof) is a nice base to add a few small bitz to.

For those of us who want horde IG infantry armies but can't afford to drop a thousand bucks on them, it looks like a nice start. Also, I'd feel terrible about buying FW DKoK and then speed-painting them, which is the only way that I (and most low-level GW hobbysists) will ever get 100+ of these suckers done up.

BTW, for those interested in bargains on Krieg, I do suggest you check out the Gorgon passengers cut-ups that some folks like nathonicus have done on here. Halves the price or so for your rear-rankers, and gets you some casual poses to mix into your force.

**CT GAMER**

NAVARRO wrote:
CT GAMER wrote:This thread demonstrates that sometimes people with no modeling/converting skill will crap on something rather then see the potential for creative expression.

I'd be curious to see a fully converted and kitted out IG model using it as a basis with GW bits, etc. and will pass on judging what amounts to a conversion component as far as its use w/ 40K is concerned until then.

Though it is fun to crap on someone Else's work to be sure.

Ahh Dakka... you can just feel the love...

Its called having a opinion about something... but if you want to act like the primadona uber skilled person who can see the true beauty on a turd then be my guest

And now Im going to be a ass.... I would not trade my skills for yours yet I judge what I see according to my tastes... see? has nothing to do with skills or artistic nonsense but rather your preception on something.

Its not a question of having fun to crap on someone elses work... Thats maybe just your kind of artistic behaviour... to crap on everyone elses legit opinions about something that will be put on sale for all to buy.

Mick A wrote:
CT GAMER wrote:This thread demonstrates that sometimes people with no modeling/converting skill will crap on something rather then see the potential for creative expression.

I'd be curious to see a fully converted and kitted out IG model using it as a basis with GW bits, etc. and will pass on judging what amounts to a conversion component as far as its use w/ 40K is concerned until then.

Though it is fun to crap on someone Else's work to be sure.

Ahh Dakka... you can just feel the love...

Was just about to say the same sort of thing myself. This thread is the sort of thing I expect to see on a fanboy site like Taco rather than Dakka. If you guys who are comparing the figure to FW and can afford a FW IG army fair enough but us mere mortals have to seek cheaper alternatives. Anyway, if your using them in a horde style IG army are tiny details going to needed or even be noticed?

Mick

I dont get this... If something is mediocre I should nail if its GW and hail if its nonGW? At the risk o being labeled fanboy? Jezzz you guys need to change medications fast! If its a subpar product I dont care who did it, i will just nail it. Thats why I try to promote MERCS and INFINITY as great products...as much as I do it with SOME gw stuff.
Lacks Tiny details?... rofl like 28mm of them

LULZ

**Snord**

Neconilis wrote:
Tailgunner wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:Scaled them so the base diameter is exactly the same. Looks like a decent match to me. The legs are a bit shorter.

That's very helpful. And it also demonstrates just how much better the FW models are - better detail, better sculpting and (perhaps most importantly) better designed - they're clearly based on WWI soldiers, but they combine the features of more than one army (essentially French and German), rather than being thinly disguised WWII Germans. Granted they're incredibly expensive, but you get what you pay for. GW's eventual plastic Guard will be cheaper than FW's (and less detailed) and more expensive than this prototype, but they'll be better. And thus worth paying more for.

In your (not so) humble opinion.

A nasty one-liner instead of a reasoned response - good to see standards being maintained. What exactly is it you disagree with? Or do you judge the models purely on how much they cost?

**LunaHound**

I know this is a proto type , but still im disappointed.
Not because of the price , or anything ...
Its just while the concept phase was still going around , i have seen MANY MANY great ideas . Its a shame that they seem to have discarded them all and went back to the ( WW1 you guys say? ) look.

**cadbren**

lord_blackfang wrote:

Scaled them so the base diameter is exactly the same. Looks like a decent match to me. The legs are a bit shorter.

The FW is definitely a better modelled model, but that example has to be one of the worst poses that FW has come up with; the soldier is resting his hand over the business end of his las! Maybe he's hoping to be sent to the rear for awhile.

**JohnHwangDD**

Better than clogging the thing with dirt...

**smart_alex**

DId you make those? They are not even GW models. Not that GW makes the greatest models, but these look like crap. Someone would have to pay me just to have them take up space in my house. Those are uglier than the OLD cadian models from two dex's ago.

**Moopy**

JohnHwangDD wrote:Better than clogging the thing with dirt...

Amen.

**Agamemnon2**

Tailgunner wrote:A nasty one-liner instead of a reasoned response - good to see standards being maintained. What exactly is it you disagree with? Or do you judge the models purely on how much they cost?

Maybe it had something to do with the ridiculous assertion that you consider GW's upcoming plastic Guard (which most likely does not exist) to be better in quality to these (an aesthetic judgement on models which you've never seen), and worth the extra money, too.

**Neconilis**

Tailgunner wrote:
Neconilis wrote:
Tailgunner wrote:
lord_blackfang wrote:Scaled them so the base diameter is exactly the same. Looks like a decent match to me. The legs are a bit shorter.

That's very helpful. And it also demonstrates just how much better the FW models are - better detail, better sculpting and (perhaps most importantly) better designed - they're clearly based on WWI soldiers, but they combine the features of more than one army (essentially French and German), rather than being thinly disguised WWII Germans. Granted they're incredibly expensive, but you get what you pay for. GW's eventual plastic Guard will be cheaper than FW's (and less detailed) and more expensive than this prototype, but they'll be better. And thus worth paying more for.

In your (not so) humble opinion.

A nasty one-liner instead of a reasoned response - good to see standards being maintained. What exactly is it you disagree with? Or do you judge the models purely on how much they cost?

You're the one determined to get the jabs in against these figures from how I see it, and yes, cost is always the biggest factor for me, and that is my opinion. I just hate to see opinions being stated as fact. If it wasn't done deliberately or in an adversarial manner I apologize, but all you did was to state opinion as fact and that always irritates me to no end.

**H.B.M.C.**

Rico wrote:What's "inventive" in your eyes?

Vostroyans!

They were one of the few times where GW has made John Blanche's artwork (however much I hate the way he draws) leap off the page and become miniatures. Sci-Fi Laser guns with wooden stocks on guys with futuristic gasmasks and armour over the top of old dusters and beef-eater helmets. And they were the most non-derivative Guard unit in existance, considering how all the others are just a historical army unit ported over to 40K like a bad X-Box-to-PC port.

Anyway, I'm not saying that these Space Nazi's are bad models - I've only seen one and unlike Aggy I like to see a little big more before I declare something the (new) doom of mankind - I just don't like what I've seen so far.

**Neconilis**

Agamemnon2 wrote:
Tailgunner wrote:A nasty one-liner instead of a reasoned response - good to see standards being maintained. What exactly is it you disagree with? Or do you judge the models purely on how much they cost?

Maybe it had something to do with the ridiculous assertion that you consider GW's upcoming plastic Guard (which most likely does not exist) to be better in quality to these (an aesthetic judgement on models which you've never seen), and worth the extra money, too.

Thank you for that Agamemnon2.

**Osbad**

They look promising to me. I quite fancy some of them. Unlike *some* on Dakka I don't get particularly invested in my models - they're just gaming pieces for a game. Sure I like them painted reasonably, but I'm not into converting and I like to play lots of games not just 40k. That means I don't want to spend a crap ton of money on a project when I'm only likely to get a few games a year out of it.

So cheap IG proxies work fine for me.

**Vaktathi**

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
JohnHwangDD wrote:Wow, the DKOK guy totally kicks ass by comparison. Not even close on quality.
It's ah, not supposed to be. One is resin model costing about $65 for a squad of 10, the other is plastic (and *still* a prototype) going to cost like $12 for 10.

Why should plastic be inherently worse than resin?

After all, we've already seen that the resin Thunderhawk is "better" than the metal one, and the plastic Valk is "better" than the resin one.

The sculpting design of the plastic model can be quite better - just look at the 1/35 Tamiya / Dragon figures in plastic.

It's not necessarily the materials, although Resin IMO does work better for more detailed models in terms of durability, but the idea behind it. It's not supposed to be super high quality materials and super high detail figures. They are supposed to be low cost models that look somewhat decent that can be bought cheaply to attain a certain army theme without having to spend exorbitant amounts to buy the other similar styled models.

Yes, the Krieg look better. I own a ton of the guys. There's a reason I do. That said, I'd love to have a ton of cheap greatcoats as well, and these would work great for a low cost greatcoat army and could still be painted up to look solid without costing as much as a new computer for a whole armies worth.

**MeanGreenStompa**

As a cheap basis for converting, using GW bits or Pig Iron or whatever, to create a greatcoat horde army for 40k, these figures will be an excellent choice due principally to the very comfortable price. Those seeking a considerably higher detail and no conversion need will have to pay more and buy the forgeworld models.

**Snord**

Neconilis wrote:You're the one determined to get the jabs in against these figures from how I see it, and yes, cost is always the biggest factor for me, and that is my opinion. I just hate to see opinions being stated as fact. If it wasn't done deliberately or in an adversarial manner I apologize, but all you did was to state opinion as fact and that always irritates me to no end.

They're obviously opinions - what else can they be? I find it interesting how quickly some of you jump in to defend these models from criticism precisely because they're not GW products. Had this been a prototype GW model, I suspect you'd have been in there slagging it off with everyone else.

It's a fair point that, despite a few rumours, there is no sign of any plastic Guard in greatcoats. However, I can't see what's 'adverserial' about pointing out the shortcomings of this model by comparing it to what GW produce.

**MeanGreenStompa**

Tailgunner wrote:They're obviously opinions - what else can they be? I find it interesting how quickly some of you jump in to defend these models from criticism precisely because they're not GW products. Had this been a prototype GW model, I suspect you'd have been in there slagging it off with everyone else.

It's a fair point that, despite a few rumours, there is no sign of any plastic Guard in greatcoats. However, I can't see what's 'adverserial' about pointing out the shortcomings of this model by comparing it to what GW produce.

That, fairly obviously, is because if it were a GW miniature, it would cost 8times the price and be being produced by a large multinational company with huge resouces, not a small cottage industry producer. Your not comparing like for like.

**Snord**

MeanGreenStompa wrote:That, fairly obviously, is because if it were a GW miniature, it would cost 8times the price and be being produced by a large multinational company with huge resouces, not a small cottage industry producer. Your not comparing like for like.

That's a different point - I was responding to some needlessly antagonistic remarks that had nothing to do with the subject of the thread.

To answer your point, as I understand it, you're saying that you'll accept something which is (I would argue) aesthetically inferior because it's cheaper. Fair enough, but isn't that the same as saying (as I did earlier) that you get what you pay for? And why does the disparity in resources mean there can't be a comparison? If you look beyond the narrow world of sci-fi wargaming, there are small model kit producers who produce kits that are the equal of (if not better than) anything by the big producers. By producing plastic figures, implicitly intended for WH40k, they've invited comparison. Don't tell me it's unfair to make the comparison - especially when I acknowledged the price difference. Or should I have just said 'this model is gak'? That seems to be perfectly acceptable when GW products are involved.

**Kilkrazy**

I think everyone should take into account this figure is a prototype, it has not been prepared for advertising, and it is displayed on screen about 3 times 'life size'.

Also it is a forerunner for a range of figures, so there will be variation and conversion possibilities.

If you don't like the styling of the backpack and helmet that's absolutely fine, I don't myself if truth be told, and everyone is entitled to their opinion.

People shouldn't start sniping at each other's opinions, it's off topic and liable to get nasty.

**asmith**

Injection molded plastic is never going to look as good as resin because you need to put draft into the parts in order to pull them from the metal mold.

Most objects in real life are not drafted towards two parallel planes, so detail which has been adapted to be injection molded will not look as realistic as in a resin mold where no draft is required and undercut is allowed. Comparing the two for anything other than scale is pretty unfair.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
@ tailgunner: the thing people are having a problem with in your comments is you are comparing these figures to figures that don't exist, and making an assertion they will be superior with no evidence.

**kendoka**

1. Injection moulded plastics can look pretty good (SH marines...).

2. Problems with these greatcoat guard are mainly due to somewhat crappy design (and small scale - even smaller than midget-FW).

--

If the final minis will have a nicer coat (no skirt please) and are bigger (Cadian sized) + come in 4-5 different poses I will probably buy lots.

Just add MaxMini heads (http://www.maxmini.eu/store/images/falleg.jpg) and you'll have decent traitor guard.

**bubber**

MeanGreenStompa wrote:As a cheap basis for converting, using GW bits or Pig Iron or whatever, to create a greatcoat horde army for 40k, these figures will be an excellent choice due principally to the very comfortable price. Those seeking a considerably higher detail and no conversion need will have to pay more and buy the forgeworld models.

& then find out that they have to use a s**t load of GS to fill gaps & 'casting issues'. LOL

That being said I am an FW addict & can use GS to some extent so it doesn't bother me so much.

What was my point again??
Oh yes.
I got some of their zombies - not great quality but v cheap & a pulp fiction alternative to GW fantasy ones.
I will be being some of these.

**Vertrucio**

Since these are rapid prototyped, they can scale it up or down as needed. However, the smaller scale isn't a bad thing considering that'd mean they will be fluff accurate compared to SM on the table.

These will look great en mass on the table, which is what I need.

I don't like the design direction they took on these for the armor, but there was an extremely vocal minority screaming their lungs out for that particular armor. But I can live with it.

I'll be painting them all to look like Killzone 2 Helghast.