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.

 Buzzsaw wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just for the record:
4000% passed today, more than 25,000$ raised today. Guess mostly with those eminent pledges.

Since my earlier post 2 $1,480 backers have been added, meaning that Eminence level backers are responsible for at least $32,185. The growth today has been entirely (or at least to the degree it can be discerned) from these mega $1k+ pledges.

A fascinating incident for future consideration.

WWX had a similar "all-in from the top backers" mentality, and did well with their campaign, I think.

 Azazelx wrote:
Remember guys, there's an element of Boutique Cheesecake at work here - similar to Poots and his KD stuff, but without the penis monsters.

Not to mention the creative Maths at work for the values.

Ugh... "Boutique Cheesecake". That just about sums it up...

 RiTides wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just for the record:
4000% passed today, more than 25,000$ raised today. Guess mostly with those eminent pledges.

Since my earlier post 2 $1,480 backers have been added, meaning that Eminence level backers are responsible for at least $32,185. The growth today has been entirely (or at least to the degree it can be discerned) from these mega $1k+ pledges.

A fascinating incident for future consideration.

WWX had a similar "all-in from the top backers" mentality, and did well with their campaign, I think.

An excellent data point, not to be overlooked.

 RiTides wrote:

 Azazelx wrote:
Remember guys, there's an element of Boutique Cheesecake at work here - similar to Poots and his KD stuff, but without the penis monsters.

Not to mention the creative Maths at work for the values.

Ugh... "Boutique Cheesecake". That just about sums it up...

I would say that is a somewhat unfair dig at TGG: while certainly some elements of the lines are cheesecake, some are most emphatically not meant to titillate (for example, the most recent IE Snipers).

On balance, the lines being proposed by RH seem neither more nor less "cheesecake" then other established lines, such as Infinity, for example, or Bombshell Miniatures. The tenancy to dismiss projects with female miniatures in them as "cheesecake" strikes me as profoundly unhelpful.

Specifically, while I have had pointed criticism for RH on the conduct of their campaign, I have substantially less for the contents thereof. Assuming that these miniatures translate well to the medium they will have fairly impressively added not just to the number of female miniatures available for consumption, but dramatically broadened the aesthetics represented.

I've made no secret that I favor the Iron Empire sculpts and have little use for the Jailbirds. But that is precisely because they have succeeded in achieving an aesthetic division between their lines, conceptualizing three dramatically different and internally consistent artistic directions.

So, I STILL don't get where people feel like Raging Heroes got weird with their math. It all has seemed, and remains, straightforward to me. I keep hoping Azazelx or another poster of reasonable intelligence will explain that one in a bit more detail, because it still eludes me.

In addition to that, I can understand having some issues with a couple of the models, but dismissing the entire line as 'Boutique Cheesecake' seems a little disingenuous.

In any event, how does that meme go? Oh yeah!



In other news, how about that 'Kickstarter dropping pledges thing?' Anyone ever heard of anything like that before? Or is that a new thing?

 Buzzsaw wrote:

Specifically, while I have had pointed criticism for RH on the conduct of their campaign, I have substantially less for the contents thereof. Assuming that these miniatures translate well to the medium they will have fairly impressively added not just to the number of female miniatures available for consumption, but dramatically broadened the aesthetics represented.

I've made no secret that I favor the Iron Empire sculpts and have little use for the Jailbirds. But that is precisely because they have succeeded in achieving an aesthetic division between their lines, conceptualizing three dramatically different and internally consistent artistic directions.

Thank you, Buzzsaw. Eloquently put.

I feel I have encounter it before, but was quickly fixed.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
I feel I like the concept art of their rank and file much more than many of their heroes, I really hope the final models are as close to the art as possible.

Judging by the renders of the Kurganova troopers, they won't be. Which is why they won't show us any of the renders. Which is why I won't be buying any of them.

It remains to be seen, the first render was vastly disappointing and the print was not better (logical because it was from the same render), it did illustrate that the models get less fat when printed, but the fundamental problems remained, maybe this is the reason we do not see more rushed renders, or, they work extra to have several good renders/ prints ready.

Time will tell how this will evolve, but if they care for their survival, they will deliver what we want, as close to concept art as possible.

For the moment I count on their skills and commitment to accept criticism.

Well, their time is fast running out. We were supposed to see a lot more renders than what has been delivered so far.

And after the campaign ends, there is little we can do to back out if we don't like the product. I am not willing to invest that much money on heroines alone.

I am far more interested in troops snipers and support, so I should be more worried....

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Since my earlier post 2 $1,480 backers have been added, meaning that Eminence level backers are responsible for at least $32,185. The growth today has been entirely (or at least to the degree it can be discerned) from these mega $1k+ pledges.

I think it's important to note that, in many ways, this is one of those projects where people are more likely to "go big," as you can get an entire IG or alt SOB force (or both) with the highest pledge levels. It's an a la carte system, without a prepackaged dea, so you'll have three main categories of backers: those getting a few models, those getting enough models to field a platoon, and those looking for an entire army.

You've got bigger stones than me if you can buy a whole army on concepts alone. Or a bigger wallet, more likely!

I've liked most of what I've seen so far, in terms of their ability to go from concept to sculpt, but still... that's faith.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:
Since my earlier post 2 $1,480 backers have been added, meaning that Eminence level backers are responsible for at least $32,185. The growth today has been entirely (or at least to the degree it can be discerned) from these mega $1k+ pledges.

I think it's important to note that, in many ways, this is one of those projects where people are more likely to "go big," as you can get an entire IG or alt SOB force (or both) with the highest pledge levels. It's an a la carte system, without a prepackaged dea, so you'll have three main categories of backers: those getting a few models, those getting enough models to field a platoon, and those looking for an entire army.

Good point. If I had the dough, I'd be in the highest category. I was kind of surprised at how quickly the new level of box got snapped up, but it's a pleasant kind of surprise.

I too am worried about the lack of renders shown , i was expecting a lot more at this stage of the campaign. Still, judging by one shot blondie I probably shouldn't worry about the quality of sculpts.
I am enjoying the irony that my last miniatures purchase, no i lie, my 2nd last miniature purchase (after http://www.guildofharmony.com/shop_GOH_pg1.php) for the year will be recieved well into next year.

timd wrote:

 -iPaint- wrote:
At this point, I'm torn between going all in on just one faction, or splitting between Jailbirds and Iron Empire. With less than a week left, I'd have hoped to see more renders of the other 2 factions, but so far I'm not entirely sold on the troops yet. The Heroines I have faith will be represented well, but having seen both the KST Heavies and Regulars, I'm not sold on their translation from concept to miniature.
~iPaint

We do need more renders of the troops. Thinking about dropping from Commander to Lt and just getting heroines for now and waiting for troops to hit the stores. This KS has been very badly run...

To be fair to them, this is their first campaign, and I think it's pretty clear that they haven't invested the same time on a day-to-day basis following other KS as closely as many of us here have. Also remember that this is a Kickstarter to create new retail products. Should you decide to drop out of lower your pledge or just not go in for the heavies or the support or the whatever, you can still pick them up next year for a little more than they'll cost here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jimsolo wrote:

In addition to that, I can understand having some issues with a couple of the models, but dismissing the entire line as 'Boutique Cheesecake' seems a little disingenuous.

It's not a dismissal. It's a description - RH is positioned as a high quality "Boutique" miniatures brand - else their hero models wouldn't have a RRP of $18. They're also generally quite "cheesecake" in their design, clothing style and occasionally posing. If I were dismissing them I wouldn't be bothering in this thread, nor would I have a pile of the existing RH range, nor would I have almost $400 pledged in this KS.

Buzzsaw already posted a quite eloquent explanation of the oddities in their Maths.

I'm not disappointed by the figures I've seen so far.

Going to get a few "Jailbirds" and use them in Necromunda.

How do they stack up with vic's troopers? I'd like a set of other criminal type troopers. Necromunda rules on a prison planet.

 Azazelx wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jimsolo wrote:

In addition to that, I can understand having some issues with a couple of the models, but dismissing the entire line as 'Boutique Cheesecake' seems a little disingenuous.

It's not a dismissal. It's a description - RH is positioned as a high quality "Boutique" miniatures brand - else their hero models wouldn't have a RRP of $18. They're also generally quite "cheesecake" in their design, clothing style and occasionally posing. If I were dismissing them I wouldn't be bothering in this thread, nor would I have a pile of the existing RH range, nor would I have almost $400 pledged in this KS.

Buzzsaw already posted a quite eloquent explanation of the oddities in their Maths.

I'm sorry, that wasn't a personal attack on you, Azazelx. You have indeed been supportive of the campaign, and I wasn't accusing you of dismissing the line. However, other users, in this and other threads, have used the same argument to dismiss the entire line, and it is that which I find disingenuous.

As to the math, the only thing I saw was a post that showed that all their math was on the up and up. I know some folks thought it was shady that Drusilla was included in the price, and if I recall correctly, that they had attached a price tag to the digital art book that they were also including. The 'savings' only added up to what they claimed it did if you purchased the same number of selections that they had initially recommended. Were these the only points on which the math was "fuzzy," or did I miss some? (It's closing in on a hundred pages. I'm sure I've missed some posts in here somewhere. ) But these things never seemed shady to me. They were up front about all of them, even giving breakdowns on the website. I guess I don't clearly see where the assumption of shadiness is coming in from. Maybe I've just been burned too often, but this is a great deal more transparency than I'm used to. (Y'know, it could also be the years of working for the shadiest retailer in the Midwest that's coloring my perceptions as well.) Was there more to it than that?

Again, sorry if you thought I was coming after you personally. (In fact, I was trying to refute a general opinion while at the same time appealing to you for a counter-argument, since you're one of the people who has consistently proven that you are reasonable enough to persuade me to think differently about something.)

And as far as semantics go, Raging Heroes is absolutely a boutique venue. Hard to argue that. I've just had a number of people in recent days tell me that "it's just bad cheesecake," that I've started to wonder how many of them have actually looked at the whole line. Again, not a personal attack.

 Buzzsaw wrote:

I would say that is a somewhat unfair dig at TGG: while certainly some elements of the lines are cheesecake, some are most emphatically not meant to titillate (for example, the most recent IE Snipers).

On balance, the lines being proposed by RH seem neither more nor less "cheesecake" then other established lines, such as Infinity, for example, or Bombshell Miniatures. The tenancy to dismiss projects with female miniatures in them as "cheesecake" strikes me as profoundly unhelpful.

Specifically, while I have had pointed criticism for RH on the conduct of their campaign, I have substantially less for the contents thereof. Assuming that these miniatures translate well to the medium they will have fairly impressively added not just to the number of female miniatures available for consumption, but dramatically broadened the aesthetics represented.

I've made no secret that I favor the Iron Empire sculpts and have little use for the Jailbirds. But that is precisely because they have succeeded in achieving an aesthetic division between their lines, conceptualizing three dramatically different and internally consistent artistic directions.

Again, not a dismissal but a description. Bombshell Babes is most emphatically "Cheesecake", and I'm pretty sure Patrick described them as such in his KS thread. Infinity is also very much in that vein with many of their female miniatures. Exposed midriffs, pigeon-toes, schoolgirl skirts, and of course, nuns in bondage gear showing off their g-stringed arses.

Nor is it a "dismiss(al) (of) projects with female miniatures in them as "cheesecake". There's (at least) two other lines of female minis in development being sold and previewed here on Dakka that are emphatically not cheesecake, as well as a number who are. Reaper does both. If you don't see cheesecake elements in all three factions, then I think you're either choosing to ignore what you don't want to see, or getting your back up defensively due to considering the term one of derision - which is most certainly not the manner I'm using it in.

Edit - I'd also suggest that Raging Heroes as a brand is much more established than Bombshell Miniatures, regardless of how long Pat Keith has been sculpting for others.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jimsolo wrote:

And as far as semantics go, Raging Heroes is absolutely a boutique venue. Hard to argue that. I've just had a number of people in recent days tell me that "it's just bad cheesecake," that I've started to wonder how many of them have actually looked at the whole line. Again, not a personal attack.

Easy solution - ask them to show you some examples of what they consider "good cheesecake". You'll either find some potentially good artwork, or find that they can';t give you any examples, showing that they simply don't like the genre at all.

 Azazelx wrote:

 Buzzsaw wrote:

I would say that is a somewhat unfair dig at TGG: while certainly some elements of the lines are cheesecake, some are most emphatically not meant to titillate (for example, the most recent IE Snipers).

On balance, the lines being proposed by RH seem neither more nor less "cheesecake" then other established lines, such as Infinity, for example, or Bombshell Miniatures. The tenancy to dismiss projects with female miniatures in them as "cheesecake" strikes me as profoundly unhelpful.

Specifically, while I have had pointed criticism for RH on the conduct of their campaign, I have substantially less for the contents thereof. Assuming that these miniatures translate well to the medium they will have fairly impressively added not just to the number of female miniatures available for consumption, but dramatically broadened the aesthetics represented.

I've made no secret that I favor the Iron Empire sculpts and have little use for the Jailbirds. But that is precisely because they have succeeded in achieving an aesthetic division between their lines, conceptualizing three dramatically different and internally consistent artistic directions.

Again, not a dismissal but a description. Bombshell Babes is most emphatically "Cheesecake", and I'm pretty sure Patrick described them as such in his KS thread. Infinity is also very much in that vein with many of their female miniatures. Exposed midriffs, pigeon-toes, schoolgirl skirts, and of course, nuns in bondage gear showing off their g-stringed arses.

Nor is it a "dismiss(al) (of) projects with female miniatures in them as "cheesecake". There's (at least) two other lines of female minis in development being sold and previewed here on Dakka that are emphatically not cheesecake, as well as a number who are. Reaper does both.

If you don't see cheesecake elements in all three factions, then I think you're either choosing to ignore what you don't want to see, or getting your back up defensively due to considering the term one of derision - which is most certainly not the manner I'm using it in.

Oh, no. These defiantly are what they are.

They are cheesecake, but that's kind of the point. As with the void needing to be filled, this is what you get. If you want generic G.I.Jane, your looking at bland looking mini troopers with at best oversized weapons, or just oversized flak vests with some buns sticking out the back of the helmet/ neckline.

I think they know exactly what they are doing, and even with that, to me it is about the CHOICE that is the allure to them.

Point being you can get what ones YOU like.

 Grot 6 wrote:
bland looking

That's what Raging Heroes miniatures tend to be. Bland, generic cheesecake that fails to make me give a feth. IT's why I was, and remain, disappointed with the bizarre need to make the Kurganova minis' breasts several cup sizes bigger than they looked in the concept art.

A female miniature doesn't need to shove its tits and ass in your face to be a good miniature-- I'm almost invariably more interested in models which DON'T do this, because I am not interested in collecting an army of supermodels trying to play at being soldier, I'm interested in collecting an army of professional soldiers. There's nothing saying that they can't be attractive, but there is still a distinct aesthetic difference between "supermodels awkwardly holding guns" and "a plastic representation of what could be a real soldier".

Some people are in to cheesecake models. That's cool, spend your money how you want, it's yours to spend. But it's bizarre how defensive people get whenever someone says that they want something different.

 Melissia wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:
bland looking

That's what Raging Heroes miniatures tend to be. Bland, generic cheesecake that fails to make me give a feth. IT's why I was, and remain, disappointed with the bizarre need to make the Kurganova minis' breasts several cup sizes bigger than they looked in the concept art.

A female miniature doesn't need to shove its tits and ass in your face to be a good miniature-- I'm almost invariably more interested in models which DON'T do this, because I am not interested in collecting an army of supermodels trying to play at being soldier, I'm interested in collecting an army of professional soldiers. There's nothing saying that they can't be attractive, but there is still a distinct aesthetic difference between "supermodels awkwardly holding guns" and "a plastic representation of what could be a real soldier".

Do you read Tank Girl, or other comic books? You might not like them, but T and A is Peanut butter and Jelly to war gaming. You don't get the choice to change the environment. Sorry.

By and by- Tank Girl and her pals kick a lot of ass,in the same way as that stuff you see in Heavy Metal- which is what people want at the end of the day. T and A for entertainments sake. I'm not seeing too may bull !@#$ manly women miniatures out there, or rough looking ones that you see in everyday life. Buzzcut fat girls don't sell too well, I expect. I'm all for someone making a few, though. maybe they can prove me wrong.

Wargaming on tabletop does not equal PC one size fits all armor and helmets. Those Kurganova's are pornstars, anyway. I'm not seeing them being used on the tabletop instilling fear and discipline. I see those punchboards are eye candy in the classic Elsa She Wolf of the SS sense, and not to be taken seriously.

 Grot 6 wrote:
Do you read Tank Girl, or other comic books? You might not like them, but T and A is Peanut butter and Jelly to war gaming. You don't get the choice to change the environment. Sorry.

Oh, so you think that I HAVE to spend my money on some cheesecake? I'm obligated to want the same exact kind of models that you want?

That is incredibly arrogant of you.

This has nothing to do with "PC". This has to do with the fact that I have limited funds and I am under no obligation to give TGotG any of it unless they produce a product I want to buy.

 Melissia wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:
Do you read Tank Girl, or other comic books? You might not like them, but T and A is Peanut butter and Jelly to war gaming. You don't get the choice to change the environment. Sorry.

Oh, so you think that I HAVE to spend my money on some cheesecake? I'm obligated to want the same exact kind of models that you want?

That is incredibly arrogant of you.

I guess. I'm not seeing how you came to that conclusion, nor really want to go on and on about nothing.

You can read the rest of the post at anytime, chief. If you want to crank out a few generic femal/ girl/ women folk or whatever the flavor of the month term is for them solder figures and they fit in with my gear, I'm all in. Like I said, though- The environments already set. Just because you don't want it- there are ten score more that will take your place.

And yet, I'm still not obligated to give them even a single penny for any of it, no matter how much you might not like my reasons.

Whining about "PC" is pointless. Again (since you apparently ignored the first time I said it), this has nothing to do with "PC". This has to do with the fact that I have limited funds and I am under no obligation to give TGotG any of it unless they produce a product I want to buy. No matter how much you cry and scream about it, this basic fact of capitalism won't change.

 Grot 6 wrote:

T and A is Peanut butter and Jelly to war gaming. You don't get the choice to change the environment. Sorry.

Why not? the gaming industry is diverse and constantly changing.

 Azazelx wrote:

Spoiler:

 Buzzsaw wrote:

I would say that is a somewhat unfair dig at TGG: while certainly some elements of the lines are cheesecake, some are most emphatically not meant to titillate (for example, the most recent IE Snipers).

On balance, the lines being proposed by RH seem neither more nor less "cheesecake" then other established lines, such as Infinity, for example, or Bombshell Miniatures. The tenancy to dismiss projects with female miniatures in them as "cheesecake" strikes me as profoundly unhelpful.

Specifically, while I have had pointed criticism for RH on the conduct of their campaign, I have substantially less for the contents thereof. Assuming that these miniatures translate well to the medium they will have fairly impressively added not just to the number of female miniatures available for consumption, but dramatically broadened the aesthetics represented.

I've made no secret that I favor the Iron Empire sculpts and have little use for the Jailbirds. But that is precisely because they have succeeded in achieving an aesthetic division between their lines, conceptualizing three dramatically different and internally consistent artistic directions.

Again, not a dismissal but a description. Bombshell Babes is most emphatically "Cheesecake", and I'm pretty sure Patrick described them as such in his KS thread. Infinity is also very much in that vein with many of their female miniatures. Exposed midriffs, pigeon-toes, schoolgirl skirts, and of course, nuns in bondage gear showing off their g-stringed arses.

Nor is it a "dismiss(al) (of) projects with female miniatures in them as "cheesecake". There's (at least) two other lines of female minis in development being sold and previewed here on Dakka that are emphatically not cheesecake, as well as a number who are. Reaper does both. If you don't see cheesecake elements in all three factions, then I think you're either choosing to ignore what you don't want to see, or getting your back up defensively due to considering the term one of derision - which is most certainly not the manner I'm using it in.

Edit - I'd also suggest that Raging Heroes as a brand is much more established than Bombshell Miniatures, regardless of how long Pat Keith has been sculpting for others.

I'll be brutally honest: our disagreement is such that I see no profit in continued discussion, certainly not in this thread.

 Melissia wrote:

Spoiler:

 Grot 6 wrote:
bland looking

That's what Raging Heroes miniatures tend to be. Bland, generic cheesecake that fails to make me give a feth. IT's why I was, and remain, disappointed with the bizarre need to make the Kurganova minis' breasts several cup sizes bigger than they looked in the concept art.

A female miniature doesn't need to shove its tits and ass in your face to be a good miniature-- I'm almost invariably more interested in models which DON'T do this, because I am not interested in collecting an army of supermodels trying to play at being soldier, I'm interested in collecting an army of professional soldiers. There's nothing saying that they can't be attractive, but there is still a distinct aesthetic difference between "supermodels awkwardly holding guns" and "a plastic representation of what could be a real soldier".

Some people are in to cheesecake models. That's cool, spend your money how you want, it's yours to spend. But it's bizarre how defensive people get whenever someone says that they want something different.

Please forgive the bon mot, but certainly it must be very confusing for you to see people become irritable over female miniatures. A novel experience no doubt?

I joke, I joke... but in all fairness, it would seem that the solution to you problems is posting just above me...

Buzzsaw: The "solution" to the problem is quite simple-- I wait until a studio makes models I want to buy, and then I... shock of all shocks... buy them, thus doing my part in encouraging more of the same by making them more profitable.

I believe the colloquial term is "voting with your wallet" or somesuch.

 vic wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:

T and A is Peanut butter and Jelly to war gaming. You don't get the choice to change the environment. Sorry.

Why not? the gaming industry is diverse and constantly changing.

Indeed! That is the very crux of the matter; never before has it been as "easy" (I use the word guardedly) to bring new miniatures to market.

If there exists currently a segment of the market not being served it is only a (brief) matter of time before it is served. A wonderful time indeed!

 Melissia wrote:
And yet, I'm still not obligated to give them even a single penny for any of it, no matter how much you might not like my reasons.

Whining about "PC" is pointless. Again (since you apparently ignored the first time I said it), this has nothing to do with "PC". This has to do with the fact that I have limited funds and I am under no obligation to give TGotG any of it unless they produce a product I want to buy. No matter how much you cry and scream about it, this basic fact of capitalism won't change.

???

I'm not even seeing your issue then.

Where's the crying and screaming, by the way? Your the one thinking that the world revolves around you and getting defensive over some bullgak.


No one ever said you had to do anything. You made a statement, high handed as it was and read something you didn't agree with. No reason to get all butthurt over it.

You don't want them, other people do. Next.

As to Vic- YOU might do exactly that if you make a few that go along with the others of the ranges. I'd get a platoon or two of generic Penal legion females if they looked half as good as the current range of Male ones. I'd like a few to throw in with the meager selection of Eshers that I have. I know a few others that would as well. I've been waiting for a few ever since Aliens 3.

 Grot 6 wrote:
You don't want them, other people do. Next.

And yet, you were apparently offended enough by me not liking the miniatures taht you had a little rant about how I should shut up and take what I can get, when I am under no obligation to do either of those.

So obviously, you don't quite mean this statement.

 Melissia wrote:
Buzzsaw: The "solution" to the problem is quite simple-- I wait until a studio makes models I want to buy, and then I... shock of all shocks... buy them, thus doing my part in encouraging more of the same by making them more profitable.

I believe the colloquial term is "voting with your wallet" or somesuch.

I think you may not have looked closely enough above my post...

All flippancy aside, you're doing exactly what you should be doing, I do not fault you. In fact, I have done exactly as you describe since becoming involved in Kickstarter: supporting those companies that make the things I like.

To be fair, I was entirely unsure which post you were referring to, given the brisk pace of this conversation, hehe.

 Melissia wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:
bland looking

That's what Raging Heroes miniatures tend to be. Bland, generic cheesecake that fails to make me give a feth. IT's why I was, and remain, disappointed with the bizarre need to make the Kurganova minis' breasts several cup sizes bigger than they looked in the concept art.

A female miniature doesn't need to shove its tits and ass in your face to be a good miniature-- I'm almost invariably more interested in models which DON'T do this, because I am not interested in collecting an army of supermodels trying to play at being soldier, I'm interested in collecting an army of professional soldiers. There's nothing saying that they can't be attractive, but there is still a distinct aesthetic difference between "supermodels awkwardly holding guns" and "a plastic representation of what could be a real soldier".

Some people are in to cheesecake models. That's cool, spend your money how you want, it's yours to spend. But it's bizarre how defensive people get whenever someone says that they want something different.

In this case, I do have to ask why you're posting here if the RH aesthetic is completely different to what you personally enjoy. As I mentioned, there's at least two other active ranges here on Dakka that fit your stated criteria. I enjoy both, which is why I'm active in both threads, but I don't find myself drawn to post in threads where the product is something of no interest to me.

 Azazelx wrote:
In this case, I do have to ask why you're posting here

Simple. There was a range-- the Kurganovas-- of miniatures where it looked as if, from the concept art, it might be a good army to collect.

Then the miniatures came out and disappointed me. So I am expressing my disappointment.

Not every post in this thread has to be fawning and drooling over the kickstarter campaign.