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.

The only thing I like about metal minis is that when you are tired of the paint job you can drop it in laquer thinner, scrub with a tooth brush and prime and paint it again. It is nice when you have a SoB army to only have to glue on the back packs, but the pentinent engine is a beast to assemble, would love a plastic kit. Wish my seraphim and raptors were plastic, tired of them falling over from a gentle nudge on the table. My Blood Knights are a pain. Spent about 8 hours painting my own lord on horseback, put it on the table for the first time to have my opponent accidently knock the lance arm off. My cold one knights don't have that problem. Some models are great in metal, others in plastic. I glue 1" washers under my fanatics and scourges to give them a little weight and keep them from tipping. The bigger models are best in plastic where as alot of the smaller are better in metal, my opinion.

chromedog wrote:
Did you even bother to read my post?

As a matter of fact I did.

When I started, most of the wargaming stuff was metal.
If you wanted to covert anything, you LEARNED the skills required in order to do so. End result, is that to us metalheads, converting metal is no more difficult than converting plastic.

For those who did not grow up with metals and then transition to plastic (or those who just started in plastics), they don't have the skillset or tools required to work the metals (and in many cases, are also unwilling to learn them) because plastic is soooo much easier.

Sounds elitist to me.

Besides, Elitism is everywhere. Get used to it or get over yourself.

Well, people don't like elitists. Get used to it or get over yourself. You're not better than anybody.

Really confuses me why people don't like it when they're being looked down upon. "Ooooh i've been in this hobby before plastics were out I'm better than you!" Oh yes compared to you we are the least of all gamers, all hail metal lord!

chromedog wrote:Beats me.

When I started, most of the wargaming stuff was metal.
If you wanted to covert anything, you LEARNED the skills required in order to do so. End result, is that to us metalheads, converting metal is no more difficult than converting plastic.

For those who did not grow up with metals and then transition to plastic (or those who just started in plastics), they don't have the skillset or tools required to work the metals (and in many cases, are also unwilling to learn them) because plastic is soooo much easier.

Just because something is easy does not make it better.
Just because something is hard-to-do does not make it worse - but the satisfaction we get from pulling off a conversion from a metal model will often be greater than the feeling from doing the same to a plastic one.

I do anyway. I find it much more satisfying to have to work at something to get a result, than just slap bits together and spooge superglue over them.

Elitist, thank you very much.

There's a whole lot you're glossing over and downright missing. There's really no comparison to the plastic conversions you see these days to metal ones from back in the day. The process is easier which has in turn pushed the enevlope on how elaborate the conversions are now. It's not uncommon to see a model that owes parts to a half dozen donors put together in an interesting and unique fashion. Not something you'd normally see if you had to hack the metal pieces off different miniatures (not to mention the cost factor of doing so) . Plastics haven't necessarily negated the time, effort and work of converting with metal, in many cases it simply allows that same time and effort to generate more interesting results.

Overall i like plastic the best.
It's lighter, easier to assemble, doest give you bended parts like the old metal products
(example: the good 'ol chaos halberds are a disaster to get straight as you order them they are bended as what cos they are in a bag!)

Drop a plastic model and you got nothin' drop a metal model and your lucky to have it in a least 3-4 pieces, try a thirster or obli for fun

A sister of battle being one solid chunk of metal is quite nice. I can just throw it about and know it won’t break.
It also means I can strip all the paint off with Nail-polish remover very quickly should I screw up a paintjob.

The main problem I have is with the gluing. Super glue doesn't do much, neither does metal glue. Pinning also cannot be done on some models due to the small size (See Dark Elf executioner blade).

Overall I think I prefer plastic due to the ease of customisation plus the way the paint chips less on very sharp corners, 'ardcoat does address this a bit I guess.
Finecast would be the perfect answer if it didn't come with all that extra plastic fluff stuff from the moulding process.

I mentioned it briefly before, but it bears making the point that metal sculpts offer a range of pose differentiation that is just not possible in multipart plastic unless you do some serious converting/sculpting.

The sculptor of a metal (or resin) model can take into account the way muscle and fabric flexes and stretches when a torso twists and the way the leg position will change to adjust for the distribution if body weight. On a plastic model, you just twist the torso and that results in none of the anatomical reality that a sculpted model produces. Not so noticible on a space marine, but very noticible on a guardsman.

Plastic has lots of variation within certain parameters, but there are alot of poses such as crouching, hunching, etc that are just better done in metal.

I also really like the ease of paint stripping and resaleability of metal. Though it must be said that I have nothing in particular against plastic models and own many.

well metal miniatures are expensive, i saw a necron lord that was metal (then again what necron lord isn't metal?) and not only was it hard to put together it was expensive all hell, like $25.
i would understand if it was like $17 but when it's 25 i would rather just build up my army more than have an HQ.
but on the upside metal miniatures have the weight to them so they may not fall over easily so i, or anyone else don't have to glue a penny t the bottom of the base just for it to not go flying off the board when you bump it be accident.

swordman600 wrote:well metal miniatures are expensive

Finecast are more. But the price of plastics has been brought up to meet metal, because the quality was similar so people are happy to pay, was the reasoning.

Even with that price, an army needs at least one HQ slot to be filled up so ditch those immortals and get yourself an imotek!

I like metal far more than finecast, the models just feel right as opposed to light :3

it also helps that I can beat people with my exorcist if the game doesnt go my way

I like finecast over metal.... as long as it's a good cast. I heavily convert stuff so it's a blessing for me to have them easy to cut.

Guardlard01 wrote:Nowoo, words cannot describe how impressed I am with that Necron. Very good work.

Thanks!

He was a lot more fun putting together than the 12 Wraiths that followed!

I've been around the hobby since the tail end of 40k 2nd Edition and I have a pronounced preference for plastic models.

- Easy to clean up for assembly.
- Easy assembly and gluing.
- Easy to carve up for conversions (no power tools necessary).
- Drilling plastic to pin fragile joints/connections or to magnetize is much easier than with metal.
- The lightweight nature of plastic fascilitates weapon swapping via magnets far better than metal.
- More dynamic poses possible with plastic kits (remember the bullwinkle farseer?).
- Crazy things like LED eyes or headlights are prohibitively difficult in metal.
- The "lacks detail" argument no longer holds water with the new kits. Undercuts equalling better detail is mitigated by the newer 3D sculpting and sprue design process being used at GW.
- The lightweight "boardgame token" feel to plastic models can easily be remedied by gluing a nickle in the base. This also has the advantage of making the model bottom heavy so it stays on slopes better.
- Lightweight means lighter load to carry around that convention hall.
- Less powerful (cheaper) magnets can be used to magnetize your WHFB figures to their movement tray.

I could go on for an hour with this list but I expect you get the gist.

I hated metal because I have painted some (dwarf slayer lord) in metal and it took me 2 hours to paint. It looked great, but the paint would always chip at edges (used it more than normal as was my character in a Warhammer RPG 2nd ed). I have never had the same problem with plastic.

On a side note my venerable dread was a bitch to glue, absolutely miserable. It has never chipped on paint once though. So its give and take on the painting issue.

At first I wanted everything metal but now I much prefer plastic to metal. Not sold on finecast yet but I am still debating on my opinion on those.

I admit the plastic models being easier to convert is a very good point, but the metal is more durable. I once left my Imperial Guard army in the car. In a black car, in the summer. In the window of the car and in a clear Plano tackle box tray.
Every plastic base melted and twisted into lumps, but the metal minis were fine and I just glued on new bases.
And I agree there is a certain satisfaction to the heft and feel of a good metal model.

I'm going to beat you with my dreadnought
I mean beat you. With. My dreadnought.

Brotherjulian wrote:
And I agree there is a certain satisfaction to the heft and feel of a good metal model.

I'm going to beat you with my dreadnought
I mean beat you. With. My dreadnought.

Yes. Over and over, yes.

That's the 1 major thing that really appeals to me, is that it actually feels like your holding something, ya know? It doesn't feel like you're gonna break it if you hold it the wrong way.

Breotan wrote:
- The lightweight "boardgame token" feel to plastic models can easily be remedied by gluing a nickle in the base. This also has the advantage of making the model bottom heavy so it stays on slopes better.

Even if i'm 'all plastic ftw' i agree with that one!

Small armies/elite armies I prefer metal or resin, since the army is small, you have less chance of many copies of the same model on the table.

Large armies, Plastic all the way, the GW plastic kits tend to have enough opportunity to pose the models in ways that make them more unique, and a large army in plastic won't rip your arm out of the socket when you try and carry it around for a few hours.

I know a ton of people had problems with this model in metal:



Now, of course, it's finecast. I hate metal models as they are incredibly difficult to work with...

I really liked metal figures in the past, but switched to plastic after the 5th ed IG codex. The sheer amount of IG troops you almost need to convert to get a lot of the options in the codex makes metal a real hindrance.

Breotan wrote:
- The lightweight "boardgame token" feel to plastic models can easily be remedied by gluing a nickle in the base. This also has the advantage of making the model bottom heavy so it stays on slopes better.

That...is...genius!!!

In all fairness, I would have every single mini in my armies as metal as I hate resin as a modelling medium! I come from the good 'ol days on 1st/2nd ed days! Metal models are harder to convert but this in turn did show real skill. The changes from metal has also brought adapting models to a lower level of skill meaning that more people can do it - which is good!

I love the forming of metal models as they did not have that many problems and certainly a huge amount less than resin models! The weight of metal models is more pleasing than that of plastic and resin models. Dropping metal models has always been highly annoying and things bend - but with the catastrophie of 'fine'cast, at least with metal you got a STRAIGHT swords etc!

Gluing metal also has always been a problem with larger models but since then I have found an industrial strength superglue used in the building trade which has meant that I do not need to pin anything!

Now I am scouring eBay for practically any metal model as I think that it is incredibly sad that they decided to stop using such a good material.

I've always preferred plastic over metal. With the current molding technologies like slide molds, it's possible to make almost anything in plastic which will surpass white metal. Just look at all of the current plastic kits which are made by Games Workshop now. They're plastic kits are far better then where they were many years ago. They're a lot more detailed, and sharper (literally) then anything which could be made out of metal.

One thing I absolutely cannot agree with is the people arguing that metal is somehow better BECAUSE it is harder to work with, that the extra effort put into converting it makes it more fulfilling. This is just erroneous thinking, and the silliest kind of elitism, "it's better because it's worse!".

People can still (and often do) put the same amount of time and care into converting their models, they just have something much more impressive when they are done. Plastic and resin is the reason there are conversions today which are so much more impressive than anything we had 15 years ago. Are you trying to argue people are somehow less proud of the time they put into these conversions? I would argue they are MORE proud, because their works is much more apparent and dramatic, they get more praise, and they have been able to customize more of their army.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with enjoying the challenge of working with a harder material. For example, coding in assembly language can certainly be stimulating and enjoyable. But that doesn't make it SUPERIOR. and people who argue it does (and there are programmers who do) just come off as misguided, stuck in their ways, and overly nostalgic.

Metal has some superior points, as have been brought up, but arguing that being inferior at things is a strength is just silly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eilif wrote:I mentioned it briefly before, but it bears making the point that metal sculpts offer a range of pose differentiation that is just not possible in multipart plastic unless you do some serious converting/sculpting.

The sculptor of a metal (or resin) model can take into account the way muscle and fabric flexes and stretches when a torso twists and the way the leg position will change to adjust for the distribution if body weight. On a plastic model, you just twist the torso and that results in none of the anatomical reality that a sculpted model produces. Not so noticible on a space marine, but very noticible on a guardsman.

Plastic has lots of variation within certain parameters, but there are alot of poses such as crouching, hunching, etc that are just better done in metal.

I also have issues with this argument, it just isn't true. Plastic can be formed into almost any shape these days. Many of the kits available don't positions like crouching and such in order to give the buyer more posing options. It is a pragmatic decision, not a limitation of the medium.

A freaking hobby knife can go through pewter with minimal effort. I don't understand the complaints here, though I'm fairly handy with green stuff. It's really just a preference thing at the end of the day, and nobody is "right"

Edit: For the record, I love metal. Plastic models almost always seem to have horrible mold lines in my experience and I hate spending all that time cleaning. Resin... ugh. Just no. Tried it, did not like it, will try again at some point but not anytime soon.

riplikash wrote:One thing I absolutely cannot agree with is the people arguing that metal is somehow better BECAUSE it is harder to work with, that the extra effort put into converting it makes it more fulfilling. This is just erroneous thinking, and the silliest kind of elitism, "it's better because it's worse!".

People can still (and often do) put the same amount of time and care into converting their models, they just have something much more impressive when they are done. Plastic and resin is the reason there are conversions today which are so much more impressive than anything we had 15 years ago. Are you trying to argue people are somehow less proud of the time they put into these conversions? I would argue they are MORE proud, because their works is much more apparent and dramatic, they get more praise, and they have been able to customize more of their army.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with enjoying the challenge of working with a harder material. For example, coding in assembly language can certainly be stimulating and enjoyable. But that doesn't make it SUPERIOR. and people who argue it does (and there are programmers who do) just come off as misguided, stuck in their ways, and overly nostalgic.

Metal has some superior points, as have been brought up, but arguing that being inferior at things is a strength is just silly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Eilif wrote:I mentioned it briefly before, but it bears making the point that metal sculpts offer a range of pose differentiation that is just not possible in multipart plastic unless you do some serious converting/sculpting.

The sculptor of a metal (or resin) model can take into account the way muscle and fabric flexes and stretches when a torso twists and the way the leg position will change to adjust for the distribution if body weight. On a plastic model, you just twist the torso and that results in none of the anatomical reality that a sculpted model produces. Not so noticible on a space marine, but very noticible on a guardsman.

Plastic has lots of variation within certain parameters, but there are alot of poses such as crouching, hunching, etc that are just better done in metal.

I also have issues with this argument, it just isn't true. Plastic can be formed into almost any shape these days. Many of the kits available don't positions like crouching and such in order to give the buyer more posing options. It is a pragmatic decision, not a limitation of the medium.

This pretty much sums it up.

Well, I believe "old medium" elitism happens every time a new, (usually) better medium is introduced. Like how old time photographers would moan that digital photography is inferior to film, or traditional painters would argue that painting with actual paints trumps digital painting and digital painters are less skilled compared to them. There was also a time when oil painters would argue oil is better than acrylic. There were even writers who would say that typing with a typewriter is so much better than using a program.

My theory is that we humans cling to what we know, and it is a blow to our ego that the skills we earned are now obsolete and we would like to feel that they're still relevant somehow.

orkork wrote:I've always preferred plastic over metal. With the current molding technologies like slide molds, it's possible to make almost anything in plastic which will surpass white metal. Just look at all of the current plastic kits which are made by Games Workshop now. They're plastic kits are far better then where they were many years ago. They're a lot more detailed, and sharper (literally) then anything which could be made out of metal.

Isn't white metal poisonous? I swear it contains lead...

starsdawn wrote:Well, I believe "old medium" elitism happens every time a new, (usually) better medium is introduced. Like how old time photographers would moan that digital photography is inferior to film, or traditional painters would argue that painting with actual paints trumps digital painting and digital painters are less skilled compared to them. There was also a time when oil painters would argue oil is better than acrylic. There were even writers who would say that typing with a typewriter is so much better than using a program.

My theory is that we humans cling to what we know, and it is a blow to our ego that the skills we earned are now obsolete and we would like to feel that they're still relevant somehow.

That would be a fine theory, except I first started toying with the hobby in 2006 and didn't like plastic as much as metal just from messing around. By the time I got a few resin models I asked for help on how to work with them, looked stuff up, but at the end of the day they were just annoying and I felt like it was going to shatter. I've never had trouble converting metal so I fail to see how it's more or less a given that it's inferior.

In 20 years, will there be more surviving resin or metal models?

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:A freaking hobby knife can go through pewter with minimal effort. I don't understand the complaints here, though I'm fairly handy with green stuff. It's really just a preference thing at the end of the day, and nobody is "right"

Edit: For the record, I love metal. Plastic models almost always seem to have horrible mold lines in my experience and I hate spending all that time cleaning. Resin... ugh. Just no. Tried it, did not like it, will try again at some point but not anytime soon.

Just...no. No a hobby knife cant. Maybe little bits of flash, but you can't carve down a face or a symbol, you certainly can't just cut a figure through the torso.

And metal models have the same mold lines as plastic, plus a lot of flash on top.

While no ones preference is wrong, many of the arguments FOR the preference is wrong. People don't just want to have a preference, they want their preference to be 'right', and they come up with some pretty counter intuitive arguments to prove it, like the fact that since it is harder to work with t is better, or that a hobby knife can go through pewter with 'minimal' effort. That I take issue with.