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.

As a general reminder: This kind of post is considered spam. Please refrain from posting spam. Thanks! ~Manchu

kronk wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:I'd actually argue that the Vindicator is the ugliest SM model. Love the rules, but the model could use a little work. As for the Storm Raven, I'm a Space Marine player, and I like it.

Ha! It just goes to show that we all have our preferences. The vindicator is probably my favorite SM vehicle as far as looks go.

One modeler's dream is another modeler's nightmare. I like the Vindicator so much I've painted 9 of them, 3 Linebreakers for 3 different armies. Hopefully, on close inspection the Stormraven will seem better to more people.

To me, the stormraven looks like a poorly done conversion. Poking around the internet, I've found so many others that I would rather fork out ~$60 for...

Poking around the internet, I've found so many others that I would rather fork out ~$60 for...

Though the actual model is not as exciting looking as I had hoped, I have seen few conversions I genuinely like. Most of them look like badly chopped up Valkyries or flying Land Raiders or some odd combination of the two. With a few exceptions, the GW model still looks better to me even if it's not their best work of the past couple years.

I think that the storm raven just needs some more design work put into it. It seems that that would solve a lot of the design problems.

Of course, we probably shouldn't judge the model until we can see it in person, imho.

prime12357 wrote:I think that the storm raven just needs some more design work put into it. It seems that that would solve a lot of the design problems.

Of course, we probably shouldn't judge the model until we can see it in person, imho.

Agreed on all counts - though it is 'done', so it won't be getting any more design work, unless you count your own conversions!

Alpharius wrote:
Agreed on all counts - though it is 'done', so it won't be getting any more design work, unless you count your own conversions!

If it looks like that, it's gonna get converted like there's no tomorrow

prime12357 wrote:

Alpharius wrote:
Agreed on all counts - though it is 'done', so it won't be getting any more design work, unless you count your own conversions!

If it looks like that, it's gonna get converted like there's no tomorrow

If there's no tomorrow, you're going to spend today converting a stormraven?

I'm going to go hit on chicks...

For all you "I have to see it first" people - how much different do you think this thing will actually look in real life? Like if I took a picture of a toaster oven and posted it online, would you guys expect to see it magically transform into an SR-71 or something if you looked at it in real life? And really, if most people think the 50+% of the (likely extremely symmetrical) model we can see looks terrible, what will the rest of it really have to contain for it to suddenly go from complete crap to an awesome model?

MikeMcSomething wrote:blah blah from complete crap something something

I think the "wait and see" crowd most likely aren't as emotionally invested in this as you seem to be. You don't like the Stormraven. We get it. Some people do, and others can't be bothered to give a damn. Why do you care what they think about it?

It's a model for the love of Mike, and it didn't rape anyone's mother.

wolfshadow wrote:

Dysartes wrote:

HeRozZ x wrote:this stormraven is a fail compared to other conversions than this ugly thing!! i am dissapinted but in thetop left corner there is a dread that looks like a furiosos culd it be plastic??

That's the general consensus at the moment, HeRozZ.

Speak for yourself. I like it, and so do many others.

In my defence, wolfshadow, I was responding to the query regarding the plastic Furioso and just forgot to crop the first sentence out.

I'm currently nonplussed regarding the Stormraven.

Monster Rain wrote:

MikeMcSomething wrote:blah blah from complete crap something something

I think the "wait and see" crowd most likely aren't as emotionally invested in this as you seem to be. You don't like the Stormraven. We get it. Some people do, and others can't be bothered to give a damn. Why do you care what they think about it?

It's a model for the love of Mike, and it didn't rape anyone's mother.

Talk about emotional investment.

I'm pointing out the absurdity of acting like that model will somehow NOT look like it's picture, and you're uhh...I don't know really. From what I gather you think I punched your grandmother.

In my defense, if she looked like this new Stormraven, she was asking for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aren't these things fabulously expensive to develop? They couldn't run it by a few outsiders, and upon seeing those outsiders flee the scene, decide maybe they need to make it look better?

I don't think that's how GW works. They don't care what "outsiders" think, if the studio thinks it's cool then it's good. That's why they gave up on actual outside playtesting and just have all the developers play friendly, casual games with each other with 'Eavy Metal models instead. Makes sense they'd do that with their models, too...which explains how some releases got a green light. *cough*Beastmen, Daemons*cough*

I think the stormraven could have been much better, but I still think people are exaggerating, probably because they were expecting too much. It looks pretty much exactly like what I expected, a Space Marine vehicle, and I think the reason why everyone is so mad is because they were expecting something completely different for no real reason. They didn't want a Space Marine vehicle, they wanted something completely different that doesn't fit the established aesthetic at all, like the gunship from Attack of the Clones that people keep bringing up.

Still like the FW "Assault Ram" as a Storm-thingie better, too bad it would cost a mint to use 2-3 in an army.

now.. i want... to make the chibi marine just to grab two of these and paint chibi hawk on the sides >.<

damn you vitki!

Sidstyler wrote:
I think the stormraven could have been much better, but I still think people are exaggerating, probably because they were expecting too much. It looks pretty much exactly like what I expected, a Space Marine vehicle, and I think the reason why everyone is so mad is because they were expecting something completely different for no real reason. They didn't want a Space Marine vehicle, they wanted something completely different that doesn't fit the established aesthetic at all, like the gunship from Attack of the Clones that people keep bringing up.

It's not that I was expecting something completely different, I was expecting a better looking space marine vehicle

prime12357 wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:
I think the stormraven could have been much better, but I still think people are exaggerating, probably because they were expecting too much. It looks pretty much exactly like what I expected, a Space Marine vehicle, and I think the reason why everyone is so mad is because they were expecting something completely different for no real reason. They didn't want a Space Marine vehicle, they wanted something completely different that doesn't fit the established aesthetic at all, like the gunship from Attack of the Clones that people keep bringing up.

It's not that I was expecting something completely different, I was expecting a better looking space marine vehicle

i was expecting something that fit the established aesthetic of marine vehicles, which the chibi-hawk doesn't. plenty of fan conversions of valkyries manage that (though not all).

MikeMcSomething wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

MikeMcSomething wrote:blah blah from complete crap something something

I think the "wait and see" crowd most likely aren't as emotionally invested in this as you seem to be. You don't like the Stormraven. We get it. Some people do, and others can't be bothered to give a damn. Why do you care what they think about it?

It's a model for the love of Mike, and it didn't rape anyone's mother.

Talk about emotional investment.

I'm pointing out the absurdity of acting like that model will somehow NOT look like it's picture, and you're uhh...I don't know really. From what I gather you think I punched your grandmother.

In my defense, if she looked like this new Stormraven, she was asking for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aren't these things fabulously expensive to develop? They couldn't run it by a few outsiders, and upon seeing those outsiders flee the scene, decide maybe they need to make it look better?

So yes, you don't like the stormraven model, understood.

So yes, you don't like the stormraven model, understood.
Ya think?

Rhich wrote:So yes, you don't like the stormraven model, understood.
Ya think?

He won't rest until everyone hates it.

Neconilis wrote:

MikeMcSomething wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

MikeMcSomething wrote:blah blah from complete crap something something

I think the "wait and see" crowd most likely aren't as emotionally invested in this as you seem to be. You don't like the Stormraven. We get it. Some people do, and others can't be bothered to give a damn. Why do you care what they think about it?

It's a model for the love of Mike, and it didn't rape anyone's mother.

Talk about emotional investment.

I'm pointing out the absurdity of acting like that model will somehow NOT look like it's picture, and you're uhh...I don't know really. From what I gather you think I punched your grandmother.

In my defense, if she looked like this new Stormraven, she was asking for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aren't these things fabulously expensive to develop? They couldn't run it by a few outsiders, and upon seeing those outsiders flee the scene, decide maybe they need to make it look better?

So yes, you don't like the stormraven model, understood.

Except that we've been told by someone who has SEEN it (Stickmonkey) that the pic is the least flattering angle for the model, and that it looks much better than in the pic.
Meh.

I sorta-kinda-like it in the way that I like anything that is function over form.

See the A-10, Mi-24, Apache, Supercobra etc.

I agree with the "function over form" we'll see when it come out.

warboss wrote:i was expecting something that fit the established aesthetic of marine vehicles, which the chibi-hawk doesn't.

And I think it does. Almost perfectly, save for the round, manned turret on top.

Someone help me out here and define what the Marine aesthetic actually is, because it seems like we have two different definitions. Marine armor to me = boxy, ugly, and about as aerodynamic as a 50-pound brick. This thing is boxy, ugly, and doesn't look like it could actually work. It's perfect, it's just like every single other Space Marine vehicle.

But at this point I'm just repeating myself. Repeating myself. Repeating myself. Seems like people's minds are made up, for whatever reason, and for the sake of my sanity I'm just going to ignore this thread until more pics surface.

Sidstyler wrote:
And I think it does. Almost perfectly, save for the round, manned turret on top.

I think that the biggest problem that I have with the design is that funky turret and intake thing.

Sidstyler wrote:Someone help me out here and define what the Marine aesthetic actually is, because it seems like we have two different definitions. Marine armor to me = boxy, ugly, and about as aerodynamic as a 50-pound brick. This thing is boxy, ugly, and doesn't look like it could actually work. It's perfect, it's just like every single other Space Marine vehicle.

Oh come on.

You know this model could have looked like Megan Fox, naked, covered in whiskey and lying on a bed of bacon and the haters would be tooling on it.

MikeMcSomething wrote:
I'm pointing out the absurdity of acting like that model will somehow NOT look like it's picture, and you're uhh...I don't know really.

I've seen lots of pictures of new cars that I thought were ugly until I saw them in person, pictures (especially foreshortened three-quarters views) can mislead as to relative dimensions quite a lot.

This shot of an F-14 makes it appear as if its wildly stubby and half cockpit for example:


And this shot of the XF-85 goblin is equally misleading, since it fools the eye into thinking it isn't as stubby as it actually is:


So yeah, I'm waiting till I see many more pictures, and even then final judgment will be based on its looks in person.

Jack

I think you've just provided the best examples in the entire thread on how a photo angle actually influences how things look, Jack. I still think it looks ugly and I want to see how that tail boom and the wings actually connect, but simply posting a normal picture of an ugly yet functional helicopter and saying the photo of the model looks bad doesn't quite get the point across as accurately as the above shots.

Those are pretty outstanding examples of extreme foreshortening, but you still come away from them with the understanding that you're looking at an enormous F-14 and a stubby-ass Goblin. The people in the photos (and the dreadnoughts and marines for the Stormraven) standing near the vehicles also do wonders for helping a viewer understand the proportions of what they're looking at.

My point was, and is, none of the ''I'll wait till I see it" guys are going to pick up the model, and say something like "A-HA! The tail is actually 2.65 inches long, not 2.84! That makes it look good! I like this model now!" Yet this is essentially what they are claiming could happen.

The distortion in the photo of the miniature is also far less severe of an angle than say, that Goblin, and there are 10 little guys for reference with identically-sized circular bases standing all around it. Anyone who looks at the picture and is familiar with the Space Marine model will have sized the Stormraven up to probably 99% of it's actual proportions. For giggles, someone with a strong enough background in geometry could probably use the distortion in two of the Marine bases to tell you exactly how big the thing is. The F-14 is alot easier, I eyeballed it, factored in that I'm not looking at it completely sideways and guessed that about 11 of that lady would wrap around the side, and she's probably about 5'6", which put my guess of the F-14's length at 60 feet 6 inches, or 96.4% of it's actual length.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Monster Rain wrote:

Rhich wrote:So yes, you don't like the stormraven model, understood.
Ya think?

He won't rest until everyone hates it.

Reading comprehension is an acquired skill, so I attempt to be understanding when someone is clearly lacking in that department. It simply means you haven't had enough practice!

I could care less about someone's opinion of the model (Combine multiple sculptors, cloak-and-dagger secrecy, and a complete lack of communication with your fanbase until it's too late and you are virtually guaranteed to come up with a few duds from time to time) but I will be more than happy to point out the absurdity of someone who looks at that picture and legitimately thinks it somehow isn't detailed enough for them to form a true idea of what the model looks like.

MikeMcSomething wrote:
Reading comprehension is an acquired skill,

One which is useful, for example, when perusing the forum posting guidelines, especially the bit about politeness to other users.

Relax a little people, it's just toy soldiers. It's not something really important like who gets the World Cup, the distressing lack of bacon butties at work or trying to decide who was Batman's best Robin.

What if the toy soldiers are being carried around in really ugly flying egg beaters?