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.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My hypothetical inch and a half shorter Imperial Knight was in reference to people using 3D printing to model for advantage.

Which doesn't strike me as some perfidious aspect of 3D printing. That's just modelling for advantage. The method is irrelevant.

 catbarf wrote:
I took 3D model files from Battlefleet Gothic Armada 2 and printed them out, and I'm absolutely blown away by the results.

"Is it possible to learn this power?" - Anakin Skywalker

Dudeface wrote:If you approach most people and say "this game is now out of print, the company that made it has gone bust and there'll be no support ever", that's an instant turn off for someone, why do that instead of trying an actively supported game?

I'm curious- why?

As time goes on, I find myself tired of the constant churn imposed by new rules and new models and radical overhauls to the same game, and having to either keep up with a changing game (which may no longer have the characteristics you originally enjoyed) or find some small sect of similarly disenchanted grognards to play an old edition with.

The biggest issue with out of production games for me has been availability of minis. But stuff like Battletech or Horus Heresy, where models are available but new minis and new rules come out at a glacial pace, has been just fine. And 3D printing promises to make that sort of support available for any game.

H.B.M.C. wrote:"Is it possible to learn this power?" - Anakin Skywalker

It's seriously not hard at all nowadays. I went from zero 3D printer experience to getting tabletop-ready prints in a couple of days. If you go on Thingiverse or Cults3D there's a ton of content for Battlefleet Gothic specifically intended for printing.

Really, if you can get past the initial hurdles of handling toxic resin and getting your printer calibrated, you're 90% of the way there. I've also got some Imperials already done I'll be posting up in my project log soon.

Oh I know about Thingiverse and all that. I more meant extracting the 3D models from BFGA2.

I mean... AdMech ships. So many AdMech ships!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Oh I know about Thingiverse and all that. I more meant extracting the 3D models from BFGA2.

I mean... AdMech ships. So many AdMech ships!

Oh! I found a Reddit post showing a five-step process involving four different pieces of commercial software to go from the Unreal engine files to printable .stls. But also someone else already did all that work for me (plus cleaning up the models to play nice with slicer software) and put it on Thingiverse, so I just downloaded that instead.

I'd suggest poking around Thingiverse. A user named ItalianMoose has made some great AdMech ships that aren't quite as detailed as the BFGA2 ones but are better suited to printing. There's also a bunch of great remixes of his work- here's one example.

 catbarf wrote:

To bring this all back to the topic of the thread, I expect GW's 'no 3D printing' policy to remain intact for events, just as they will continue to ban third-party miniatures. As well, we can already see the attitude towards conversions growing more restrictive over time- I'd never heard of the term 'modeling for advantage' ten years ago, let alone something that gets brought up every time a creative conversion or even pose alteration is proposed. In the long run, I can see this pushing towards a divide between casual play where anything goes (but GW will not want you using non-GW minis in their stores), and competitive play where you are expected to use GW models exactly as supplied with minimal conversion. The issues people bring up in regards to 3D printing, like changing the size of a model, are already things that you can do with conventional models, and I expect to see both treated similarly.

I'm also bullish on the prospect of 3D printing drastically changing this hobby, and anticipate a phase in the next ~10 years where GW tries to actively fight its encroachment (as dully perceived by them). That's just in their corporate DNA now -- they're institutionally reactionary, and have no shot of ever independently embracing/innovating a new technology or cultural phenomenon that comes around.

I'd expect a bunch of obnoxious proof-of-purchase requirements for people who want to play in "official" GW tournaments of the future. Like, you'll have to build your armylist in their official army builder app to submit it to a sanctioned tourney. Boxes of models will come with p-o-p codes that you need to input into your virtual collection. Or having those codes will unlock new stratagems or command points or whatever. The community reaction would be a bloodbath, but I don't think the company that did Finecast and then exploded Warhammer Fantasy Battles gives af.

btw if you'd never heard the phrase "modelling for advantage" that's just on you. 30 seconds of lazy googling:

2007: https://www.warseer.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-92470.html
2010: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/318093.page
2011: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/373715.page

I've seen that phrase/concept in use since at least 4th edition (and it was probably around earlier, I was just a more inattentive dabbler during my time playing 3rd).

Dudeface wrote:

Beyond suggesting the social impaired might have difficulties, if you asked me to play BFG as mentioned above by catbarf, without personal access to a 3d printer it literally wouldn't be worth my time.

So you're opposed to trying new (to you) games? even if you think they look like fun?
You do realize that you don't need personal access to a 3d printer, right? There's plenty of creators on Esty, Thingsverse, etc who're making this stuff & will print it for you. There's also companies who just do printing.

You're also mistaking playing the game with having the models. Believe me, BFG works just fine with tokens/pawns. It just looks cooler with actual minis.
If you like the game well enough THEN you look into how to source models for it.

Dudeface wrote:
Your best bets are some people who just happen to have the stuff lying around or are willing to trawl around for odds and ends. If you approach most people and say "this game is now out of print, the company that made it has gone bust and there'll be no support ever", that's an instant turn off for someone, why do that instead of trying an actively supported game?

Well that's why you don't give them such a negative sales pitch.

As for the why concerning some oop game vs something currently supported by a company? Because I LIKE oop game X & would like to continue to play it. To do that I need other players. Sometimes even new players as I & my main circle of gaming friends aren't getting any younger and every few years there's a few less of us.
So if I want to play BFG, Man-O-War, any of the various versions of Epic, or even actual WHFB? I have to be a bit pro-active & recruit new interest in the oop games I enjoy.

ccs wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Beyond suggesting the social impaired might have difficulties, if you asked me to play BFG as mentioned above by catbarf, without personal access to a 3d printer it literally wouldn't be worth my time.

So you're opposed to trying new (to you) games? even if you think they look like fun?
You do realize that you don't need personal access to a 3d printer, right? There's plenty of creators on Esty, Thingsverse, etc who're making this stuff & will print it for you. There's also companies who just do printing.

You're also mistaking playing the game with having the models. Believe me, BFG works just fine with tokens/pawns. It just looks cooler with actual minis.
If you like the game well enough THEN you look into how to source models for it.

The problem for many people is a combination of the value of their time and reticence to get into a game that isn't supported any more. A lot of people have very limited hobby time and would prefer to fill that time with a "known" experience. Using some of that valuable time on an unknown quantity is just not worth it for many people. The big draw of miniature games for a lot of people is the combination of the spectacle and the gameplay so using tokens would be an instant turn-off for many. There's a limit to how much random stuff people are willing to accumulate for various games as well. You might be able to get BFG ships on Etsy but combine that with the 3 or 4 other dead games people still have stuff for, plus various other bits and pieces and adding more to that pile may not be a top priority.

The reality is, for many people, playing a non-supported game is a non-starter. Lack of models, lack of enthusiasm from others and lack of time can all factor into it. It's not necessarily about lacking social skills or friends.

Slipspace wrote:

The reality is, for many people, playing a non-supported game is a non-starter. Lack of models, lack of enthusiasm from others and lack of time can all factor into it. It's not necessarily about lacking social skills or friends.

Pretty much. Even if it is a lack of friends or social skills, people who lack those things (and there are plenty who do, especially within less mainstream hobbies) aren't going to cultivate them in a vacuum and use those new friends and skills to start a group focused on out-of-production miniatures games.

In fact, it's more likely to go the other way around. Someone who doesn't have a lot of friends is going to have an easier time finding people to spend time with if they seek out an activity that a bunch of other people already want to do.

 Altruizine wrote:


I've seen that phrase/concept in use since at least 4th edition (and it was probably around earlier, I was just a more inattentive dabbler during my time playing 3rd).

For what it is worth this phrase originated in 5th edition, and came along with the change to have the game switch to true line of sight. In previous editions targeting and line of sight were based on abstractions. I personally still prefer 2nd through 4th edition for exactly this reason.

When you are dealing with true line of sight, then all of a sudden there is a potential competitive advantage to what your models look like.... they have to be the right height and width so that they get all the appropriate benefits and penalties when determining sight. And so of course "modeling for advantage" entered the lexicon during 5th edition.

RandomHeretic wrote:

 Altruizine wrote:


I've seen that phrase/concept in use since at least 4th edition (and it was probably around earlier, I was just a more inattentive dabbler during my time playing 3rd).

For what it is worth this phrase originated in 5th edition, and came along with the change to have the game switch to true line of sight. In previous editions targeting and line of sight were based on abstractions. I personally still prefer 2nd through 4th edition for exactly this reason.

When you are dealing with true line of sight, then all of a sudden there is a potential competitive advantage to what your models look like.... they have to be the right height and width so that they get all the appropriate benefits and penalties when determining sight. And so of course "modeling for advantage" entered the lexicon during 5th edition.

I don't think that's accurate, the phrase predates 5th.

I believe 4th edition measured LOS to <paraphrased> "the body, excluding wings, tails, weapons, banners, etc." right? Even in that era people would discuss, for example, kneeling models, and whether that would be MFA. Back then they weren't concerned about people drawing LOS to the tip of a gun... but if a model's entire body was at a different height from its army-mates, it would be harder to see.

4th also had the "block LOS to friendly models twice your height," yeah? I think I was reminded of that rule by one of your recent posts, actually. But it meant that giving a small model a more upright pose (or a large model a crouching pose) would change the list of things it could block or be blocked by. I remember stacking up all my Tyranids to see who could shield who.

Meanwhile GW is hiring an "Infringement Assistant" to scavenge the web in search of similar 40k models to copyright strike them!

https://jobs.games-workshop.com/search-and-apply/infringements-assistant

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Meanwhile GW is hiring an "Infringement Assistant" to scavenge the web in search of similar 40k models to copyright strike them!

https://jobs.games-workshop.com/search-and-apply/infringements-assistant

Absolutely incredible! Some folk must be foaming from the mouth at this opportunity! I would imagine this job will get a significantly higher salary than what they paid the guy who designed adeptus titanicus and the reboot of blood bowl.

Slipspace wrote:

ccs wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Beyond suggesting the social impaired might have difficulties, if you asked me to play BFG as mentioned above by catbarf, without personal access to a 3d printer it literally wouldn't be worth my time.

So you're opposed to trying new (to you) games? even if you think they look like fun?
You do realize that you don't need personal access to a 3d printer, right? There's plenty of creators on Esty, Thingsverse, etc who're making this stuff & will print it for you. There's also companies who just do printing.

You're also mistaking playing the game with having the models. Believe me, BFG works just fine with tokens/pawns. It just looks cooler with actual minis.
If you like the game well enough THEN you look into how to source models for it.

The problem for many people is a combination of the value of their time and reticence to get into a game that isn't supported any more. A lot of people have very limited hobby time and would prefer to fill that time with a "known" experience. Using some of that valuable time on an unknown quantity is just not worth it for many people. The big draw of miniature games for a lot of people is the combination of the spectacle and the gameplay so using tokens would be an instant turn-off for many. There's a limit to how much random stuff people are willing to accumulate for various games as well. You might be able to get BFG ships on Etsy but combine that with the 3 or 4 other dead games people still have stuff for, plus various other bits and pieces and adding more to that pile may not be a top priority.

The reality is, for many people, playing a non-supported game is a non-starter. Lack of models, lack of enthusiasm from others and lack of time can all factor into it. It's not necessarily about lacking social skills or friends.

People really underestimate just how MUCH time and motivation and how many friends you need to keep...pretty much anything going. I have 4 friends who all love board games and love playing DND (2 of them have watched literally nothing but youtube DND games for like the past year). We've been trying to get a campaign going for over a year now and haven't managed it (2 essential workers and 1 work from home meant 3/5ths of us worked MORE during lockdowns). Before that we'd had multiple campaigns fall apart due to scheduling issues. I can't even remember the last boardgame we played.

The same group I've been trying to get into miniature games but even with them liking the games, the number of games/hobby nights that get done is very small. We have Legion, MCP, Xwing, Sigmar, 40k, you name it, so far the only thing I can get any of them to play is MCP and that's because games are like...25 minutes a lot of the time.

Any kind of hobby, but miniatures games especially, lives and dies by their community. Rotating people in and keeping people engaged is HARD. Any game that doesn't have some kind of centralized organization pushing it, designing new content, etc, is going to rely entirely on people being absolute die-hard fans (and geographically nearby) to keep it going.

(TTS mitigates this somewhat by easing the geography issue but it's still a pretty limited platform).

ERJAK wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

ccs wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Beyond suggesting the social impaired might have difficulties, if you asked me to play BFG as mentioned above by catbarf, without personal access to a 3d printer it literally wouldn't be worth my time.

So you're opposed to trying new (to you) games? even if you think they look like fun?
You do realize that you don't need personal access to a 3d printer, right? There's plenty of creators on Esty, Thingsverse, etc who're making this stuff & will print it for you. There's also companies who just do printing.

You're also mistaking playing the game with having the models. Believe me, BFG works just fine with tokens/pawns. It just looks cooler with actual minis.
If you like the game well enough THEN you look into how to source models for it.

The problem for many people is a combination of the value of their time and reticence to get into a game that isn't supported any more. A lot of people have very limited hobby time and would prefer to fill that time with a "known" experience. Using some of that valuable time on an unknown quantity is just not worth it for many people. The big draw of miniature games for a lot of people is the combination of the spectacle and the gameplay so using tokens would be an instant turn-off for many. There's a limit to how much random stuff people are willing to accumulate for various games as well. You might be able to get BFG ships on Etsy but combine that with the 3 or 4 other dead games people still have stuff for, plus various other bits and pieces and adding more to that pile may not be a top priority.

The reality is, for many people, playing a non-supported game is a non-starter. Lack of models, lack of enthusiasm from others and lack of time can all factor into it. It's not necessarily about lacking social skills or friends.

People really underestimate just how MUCH time and motivation and how many friends you need to keep...pretty much anything going. I have 4 friends who all love board games and love playing DND (2 of them have watched literally nothing but youtube DND games for like the past year). We've been trying to get a campaign going for over a year now and haven't managed it (2 essential workers and 1 work from home meant 3/5ths of us worked MORE during lockdowns). Before that we'd had multiple campaigns fall apart due to scheduling issues. I can't even remember the last boardgame we played.

The same group I've been trying to get into miniature games but even with them liking the games, the number of games/hobby nights that get done is very small. We have Legion, MCP, Xwing, Sigmar, 40k, you name it, so far the only thing I can get any of them to play is MCP and that's because games are like...25 minutes a lot of the time.

Any kind of hobby, but miniatures games especially, lives and dies by their community. Rotating people in and keeping people engaged is HARD. Any game that doesn't have some kind of centralized organization pushing it, designing new content, etc, is going to rely entirely on people being absolute die-hard fans (and geographically nearby) to keep it going.

(TTS mitigates this somewhat by easing the geography issue but it's still a pretty limited platform).

Thank you both for expanding on this very eloquently and I'm glad other have the same views and experiences. I wasn't overly fond of the concept that it simply boiled down to "go have more friends to press gang into stuff".

I get a couple of nights a month to game with a small child and a busy partner who often works evening as well, I'd rather use that for the games I'm able to actively pour my time into and (for lack of a better word) consume without having to scour the internet for obscure rules and 3rd party minis for unsupported games, that frankly neither I nor my opponent may actually have any prior knowledge of personally.

A good example was when a friend tried to drum up hype for titanicus. I played a few games and it's a cracking rules set, but getting a full 2nd set of scaled terrain and then the almost guilt of having the army I'd been working on for 40k just sitting collecting dust was enough to put me off using the limited time and resources I have. And that's with a live, slowly supported game.

I’m kind of at the other end. I also have limited time and kids and suchlike, and i rather enjoy collecting rule sets. The modelling side is nice too, but I rarely get the chance to play a game.

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Meanwhile GW is hiring an "Infringement Assistant" to scavenge the web in search of similar 40k models to copyright strike them!

https://jobs.games-workshop.com/search-and-apply/infringements-assistant

Hmm, that can't be right.

We have it on good authority that anyone who claimed Games Workshop's new IP rules were a precursor to increased legal action was a vitriolic, hateful fearmonger.

<<< Sorry for the ramble but this touches a couple different topics >>>

Yeah - 3d printing is the way of the future. Just like all technology it will continue to get better and cheaper. After market (now digital) foundries will get better - after market rule sets will get better. So where will that lead GW?

Thing is - GW/Citadel almost always had the best models and best castings (when they were paying attention). They absolutely blew away the fantasy miniatures of the time and had great Marines and Aliens...and then wait - They created a marketing machine to sell those models. First out of the back of a magazine, then in a huge catalogue that allowed for full customization, then blisters and boxes, then plastics, then the web...

The rule sets were just a way to sell the models, and became very popular, on the backs of the models, but are rarely the best in class. It was obvious in the 90's, with the releases of 40k and WHFB (2nd editions?) and the codex system that the base rules were OK but constantly amended so that people would buy more/new/different models. AKA - rules bloat....

Anyway - Where does that leave GW? Are the a rules company? Are they a content company (see a YouTube video released today about 40k lore as a direct rip off of Dune)? Or are they a Miniature company?

If they are a rules company.... as previously discussed they need to pay their writers/designers better to make a game that more people can access...
If they are a content company... they need to pay thier writers better and take a little more time and care with fleshing out the rest of the universe.

If they are a miniature company... they should be scared and I suspect they are and are very aware of what is happening now with the perfect storm of lockdown/technology/demand. They are profiteering while they can. I can actually see GW making/selling an all-in-one 3d print device that is equipped with "20 Models or 5 vehicles" and a cartridge recharge that includes the "new and improved GW designed Iyanden craftwrold eldar. Next month - unique Biel-Tan!" (think pay as you go phones) etc.. Honestly the idea of licensing with 3rd parties I can see that as well.

We are very quickly entering a time where someone can make a "One Page Rules" or Kit bash a set of rules from 4th to 8th edition 40k and then 3d print at home a playable army for less than a GW rule set starter box and army box. Not only that - but space lizards? Sure. Beaky helmet? Sure. Multiple horns off of the shoulders? Sure. Neeedlers? Sure. Wnat to play in 15 MM? Sure. Mad Max dune buggies? I mean the possibilities are endless for people that like tabletop games. So this really only applies to people that like to paint/play TTG's, less so for GW only gamers.

Anyway - the levee may break at some point when GW prices get so far above the cost too print unique models that people start leaving the brand and going independent.

Direct copies of copyrighted models - lets be clear - is illegal and just because a tourney judge or store owner cant prove it, or because a provider cant produce it fast enough doesn't justify it.

Tome_Keeper wrote:


Thing is - GW/Citadel almost always had the best models and best castings (when they were paying attention).

Heavy doubt on that one.

The main thing GW has for them is that theyre the biggest wargaming miniature

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Tome_Keeper wrote:


Thing is - GW/Citadel almost always had the best models and best castings (when they were paying attention).

Heavy doubt on that one.

The main thing GW has for them is that theyre the biggest wargaming miniature

Sure, every 40k-related subreddit and other group adjacent to places where the normal internet nerd population tends to reside isn't continuously flooded by people wanting to know about the fairly unique and interesting lore of the setting, in the way that I've never ever seen occur with something like WMH or Infinity or any other non-established IP. It's definitely just only always ever because it's the thing people play already, and it's somehow, always been like that!

 the_scotsman wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Tome_Keeper wrote:


Thing is - GW/Citadel almost always had the best models and best castings (when they were paying attention).

Heavy doubt on that one.

The main thing GW has for them is that theyre the biggest wargaming miniature

Sure, every 40k-related subreddit and other group adjacent to places where the normal internet nerd population tends to reside isn't continuously flooded by people wanting to know about the fairly unique and interesting lore of the setting, in the way that I've never ever seen occur with something like WMH or Infinity or any other non-established IP. It's definitely just only always ever because it's the thing people play already, and it's somehow, always been like that!

Isnt 40k the first big wargame to get popularized?

Rogue trader : 1987
Infinity : 2005
Warmachine : 2003
Bolt action : 2012
Malifaux : 2009
Star Wars legion : 2018
Gasland : 2010

Oh yeah, it is. So my comment about them being the biggest wargame holds true. I'm not saying the game is irredeemable, just that its got a lot of help from its momentum. When is the last time you walked into an LGS that sells wargames, which games did they have the most in stock? Probably 40k.

40k has more than 15 years on the other main wargames that are still supported to this day.

 the_scotsman wrote:

Tome_Keeper wrote:


Thing is - GW/Citadel almost always had the best models and best castings (when they were paying attention).

Heavy doubt on that one.

The main thing GW has for them is that theyre the biggest wargaming miniature

Well - what i meant by the "way back" was in fact the late 80's and early 90's. Their fantasy stuff in particular was the best available in detail, and as mentioned, in casting when they were paying attention. A little stiff compared to to some of today's plastic multi-part kits, but I still have some fantasy elves cast in metal 30 years ago that stand up to todays figs. rogue trader marines look goofy AF compared to primaris today, but compared to what was available in 1989? 1993? They built on that and the popularity of the game systems that were supported by the miniatures. Everyone liked Laserburn better but 25-28 mm Sci-fi was super appealing, and a rule set supported it was OK - both were expensive though.

They are now... They weren't at the time. I am pretty sure that it was GDW, Dungeons and Dragons, and Ral Partha in miniature wargaming which was largely historic. I think i remember that Wizards of the Coast was the largest and most profitable in that era.

In the modern era - how many of any miniatures that people currently use are hand sculpted? From what I have seen... none. They are computer CAD/CAM designed which just seems to lend itself to personal 3D printing. Only the scale of production is different.

The ability and tools that people have today to design and then print their own models is amazing so large scale mini manufacturers like GW have to find a way to adapt and stay relevant.

Nothing will ever beat Ral Partha for me personally. Some of those sculpts have such a timeless spirit to them.

However I do think we are entering into a new golden age of sculpt design with 3d printing. Just cruising around gumroad, etsy etc I see so many absolutely fantastic, unique takes on timeless sci-fi and fantasy themes. I unfortunately do not have living conditions amenable to 3d printing so I am eagerly waiting for the next leap in technology so I can find a way to get them printed!

 catbarf wrote:

Dudeface wrote:If you approach most people and say "this game is now out of print, the company that made it has gone bust and there'll be no support ever", that's an instant turn off for someone, why do that instead of trying an actively supported game?

I'm curious- why?

Some people don't like buying used cars because they don't want to deal with all of the effort required to fix them up, and the fact that they can't really know how much work it will be to fix and maintain the things.

Out of print games are the same sort of thing. "That issue that you've encountered was fixed in this errata/FAQ/expansion that you don't have, and can't find a description of."

Sure, there are people who love buying beat up cars and fixing them up. And there are people who love finding old games and tinkering about with them. But there are people who don't.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
Not sure that would make much difference Doc as cover doesn't do much for titanic units, maybe a in theory with really big LOS blocks

Here it wasn't that uncommon to have 1-2 knight blocking terrain piece even in 8e.

 solkan wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

Dudeface wrote:If you approach most people and say "this game is now out of print, the company that made it has gone bust and there'll be no support ever", that's an instant turn off for someone, why do that instead of trying an actively supported game?

I'm curious- why?

Some people don't like buying used cars because they don't want to deal with all of the effort required to fix them up, and the fact that they can't really know how much work it will be to fix and maintain the things.

Out of print games are the same sort of thing. "That issue that you've encountered was fixed in this errata/FAQ/expansion that you don't have, and can't find a description of."

Sure, there are people who love buying beat up cars and fixing them up. And there are people who love finding old games and tinkering about with them. But there are people who don't.

Unlike a used car, though, you can try a game and find out if it is a Lennon or a Lemon without too much investment...

And if it is a Lennon, you have found something you enjoy!
If it is a Lemon, you can never play it again and only have wasted an hour or so!

Most of the used cars, like most of the OOP games, don't require any fixing when they are put on 2nd hand market. They're good to go as they are. I'm assuming that both those mentioned used cars and OOP games are complete, they don't lack pieces. That comparison is meaningless.