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.

Thanks for that, Smokestack!

Totally understandable, and like I said, I think this was a misunderstanding from their communication during the campaign. A bit disappointing for them not to discuss the possible 5th normal torso - as that could have provided another torso in the original style. But given their talk of timeline pressure, it seems unlikely to happen unless they totally commit to it.

If anyone wants my pledge at a great discount, please PM me!

Not going to lie I laughed at the part when he said " there's a snowflake's chance in hell to please 100%". So very true. That being said while I would have preferred all chain mail since I am getting 80 of the maidens I am just going to take a the chain-mail girls and make their own unit with just them, so it all works out for me. I can understand points of view from both sides though. As long as they are high quality in the end I will be a very happy camper!

 RiTides wrote:
Thanks for that, Smokestack!

Totally understandable, and like I said, I think this was a misunderstanding from their communication during the campaign. A bit disappointing for them not to discuss the possible 5th normal torso - as that could have provided another torso in the original style. But given their talk of timeline pressure, it seems unlikely to happen unless they totally commit to it.

If anyone wants my pledge at a great discount, please PM me!

I would have taken you up on that if they still had bare midriffs.

I'll wait till I get mine but I will probably shift mine or send them back if they come with the bakini plate that was shown in that render.

It is understandable, yes, but well... disappointing all the same. Ah well.

overtyrant wrote:
I'll wait till I get mine but I will probably shift mine or send them back if they come with the bakini plate that was shown in that render.

I'll wait to see them "in the flesh" so to speak, but given the fact that there are basically two sculpts out of six that I see myself using and that there's four boxes coming... yeah, probably will be sending them back or something to that effect. Shame, really.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wehrkind wrote:The poses are not bothering me much. Not super dynamic, but even used individually they are at least in a reasonable pose. They looks like they might be standing comfortably waiting for the big clash to happen, not like perma jumping over a wall or something

Well, the poses don't bother me too much either, not really, but I have two main problems with them (of course, I haven't seen the arms, which I hyope won't all be straightened, so that surely will give them more movement).

The first problem I have with them is that, as they are single piece legs+torsos combination, there are only so many possibilities (although yes, I understant that it allow them to be more natural).

The second problem is that, seeing all the bruhaha with the boobplates and how much has Shieldwolf hammered us with this:

Hi all! (Angelos here)

-The concept artwork shown during the project has to match the final product (and if not match due to tooling issues be at least very close).

...well, it strikes me as somewhat hypocrital to see it bandied so much for that, and so little for this. These are the concept art shown during the project, you know:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/139394575@N08/24855435522/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139394575@N08/24742542096/

(flickr won't let me just post the images)

...and these are what we apparently are getting:




...and well, they certainly don't match the concept art all that much. So, if "the concept artwork shown during the project has to match the final product (and if not match due to tooling issues be at least very close)", that should be much closer.

As a last thought, I'm not sure how those poses fit with the ranger parts. I assumed those would be some kind of skirmishers.

@Albertorius
I am engaging with you not because I am out to convince you but to replicate to the above post. I do not hide from criticism as it's not in my blood nor character. The issue of a poll came up and I took my time to think this through before posting an answer in that regard. I am 100% certain that what has been promised is going to be delivered, but as I wrote on the KS update page some people will still not be pleased. It happens to all KSs I guess. :-)

You show this picture for the artwork

and say it's not faithful to the final product we are going to tool. You fail to mention the part in the front page where we have explicitely witten that "All models will be given realistic and rank&file fitting poses". I strongly doubt you'd have wanted the 2nd model from the left or even worse the trident wielding lady being sculpted as shown.
On top of that, we had said that there will be some changes on how the minis would look and some items removed/changed e.g. the knee-pads of the 1st model etc. We had prepared actual renders of how the main kit would be like (although in this particular example the weapon was strongly criticized and although we sculpted it it will not go into the final kit).

and not only that but we showed also how the assembly would be like


Last but not least, I read somewhere that the artwork was too small to notice (or something like that). I nor anyone else from my Team saw this and at no point (to my knowledge at least) were we asked about the plated armor and dodged the question nor did anyone ask for larger pictures to which we didn't immediately satisfy the request! But even assuming for argument's sake that the artwork was indeed "too small" and that some backers would have been bothered seeing it being "cheesecake". Take a look at updates #3,#6, #11, #12, #18, #20, #21 and #22, where images are certainly large enough for anyone. Here's a link below to show you.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1273312680/war-is-coming-shieldmaidens-army-reboot/posts/1508657

It's funny (to me at least) seeing the artwork and claiming that the other artwork would have been diferent. If someone didn't notice in order to be bothered enough to withdraw their pledge (we had 565 backers, that's a considerable amount of eyes looking), that doesn't under any circumstance mean Shieldwolf switched the designs nor mislead anyone. If it was up to me I would have stuck with the initial concept without bothering with additional torsos, But this is a collective effort where we all put our money to create something that wouldn't have been created. We simply complied to a number of change to satisfy what backers were asking for; "non-bare midriff" design. I think it was written a large number of times and I don't know what's the issue here, English might not be my first language but I don't see any language barriers, it's spelled out very clear to me.

I consider myself a person who calls a spade a spade. Had I believed I had presented something wrong, I would have said so; but in all honesty, I don't believe any mispresenation nor misleading comments/images were ever displayed by anyone from Shieldwolf.
If you or anyone else don't like the concept or you have changed your mind, then by all means step on the "quality issue" refund policy (which we both know is not going to be the real reason obviously) and send them back, my instructions are clear and you will be refunded asap, I don't fool around. But stating we are not true to the concept artwork or we are delivering not-as-promised is totally unfair imo and I wanted to tell you that.

Thanks for reading.

Angelos.

 Shieldwolf Miniatures wrote:

You show this picture for the artwork

Spoiler:

and say it's not faithful to the final product we are going to tool. You fail to mention the part in the front page where we have explicitely witten that "All models will be given realistic and rank&file fitting poses". I strongly doubt you'd have wanted the 2nd model from the left or even worse the trident wielding lady being sculpted as shown.

On top of that, we had said that there will be some changes on how the minis would look and some items removed/changed e.g. the knee-pads of the 1st model etc. We had prepared actual renders of how the main kit would be like (although in this particular example the weapon was strongly criticized and although we sculpted it it will not go into the final kit).

Spoiler:

and not only that but we showed also how the assembly would be like

Spoiler:

Yes, you put that they would be in fitting rank & file poses. "Rank & file" have two main meanings: "The enlisted troops, excluding noncommissioned officers, in an army" and "The people who form the major portion of a group, organization, or society, excluding the leaders and officers". That's what I took from it, not "they will be posed so as to fit neatly in a rank & file unit". Maybe it's because I was expecting to use them for skirmish games that I took "rank & file" as "non heroes".

This is a misunderstanding on my part, but understand that people could get to that misunderstanding pretty easily.

OTOH, you also posted that "all models are currently shown in T-pose (for demonstration purposes only!) and weaponry is a bit oversized compared to what the final miniatures will actually look like!". So we knew that the renders' poses were not representative, there.

Also for the record, I would have been fine being able to do the "come at me, bro!" 2nd pose from the left, and I kind of love the martial arts staff trident wielding fourth pose. Who knew, right?

It's funny (to me at least) seeing the artwork and claiming that the other artwork would have been diferent. If someone didn't notice in order to be bothered enough to withdraw their pledge (we had 565 backers, that's a considerable amount of eyes looking), that doesn't under any circumstance mean Shieldwolf switched the designs nor mislead anyone. If it was up to me I would have stuck with the initial concept without bothering with additional torsos, But this is a collective effort where we all put our money to create something that wouldn't have been created. We simply complied to a number of change to satisfy what backers were asking for; "non-bare midriff" design. I think it was written a large number of times and I don't know what's the issue here, English might not be my first language but I don't see any language barriers, it's spelled out very clear to me.

Language barrier or not... "non-bare midriff" and "non-bare midriff plus plate" seem to not mean the same thing.

Anyways, we've all made our points and the die, as they say, is cast, so there's not much more reason to argue.

@Albertorius
I am not arguing with you (nor with anyone else for that matter), I appreciate the support but I did find the reaction excessive. We were tracking the project like 16-20 hours per day to answer everyone's question(s), just like we did when monitoring forums and private messages, emails and Facebook messages. If someone was unsure, all he had to do is ask.

Anyway, we still have a lot of work to do on the project, as you say this has no meaning dragging it on. :-)

Shieldwolf, as a point of constructive feedback, I'd just like to point out you might want to work on your responses to model critique / feedback. In both if your campaigns, I'm not sure if it's you (Angelos) or Georgios replying... But a ton of text gets typed to "allay any concerns", but the result is almost always "no change".

That's what disappointed me about this - I was so excited to see you finally take feedback, and you continually pointed to this stretch goal for folks asking you to make the last two bodies match two of the originals. I honestly think you're playing it both ways a bit - responding to critiques as if you're taking them onboard, then doing something you'd planned anyway. It would be better in the future to just be more straightforward, it would avoid misunderstandings. As it is now, you're sticking to one thing (rough concept many of us barely noticed, and thought was just that, a concept) and abandoning another (all the communication during the campaign about these torsos meeting the concern people had about the minis). It seems to me that you're using semantics and minimizing some backers you intentionally wooed with this stretch goal, and again to not even address the 5th standard torso (which if done in the original style could please everybody!) is a bummer.

In the end, I want the best for you guys and so have sold my pledge rather than having you ship to me and then pay for a return/refund - as a backer, I really don't want you to have to absorb that. But having backed both your campaigns, I think it's fair to say that all your communication with backers is, in the end, not really influencing your design. This could be very good in some ways - but you would do better to communicate that way during the campaign, rather than to say you are taking on feedback only to toss it aside later, and use semantics to make it sound like the feedback was never out of line with what you created.

Finally, I understand you can't please everyone - but all the more reason to be clear about this during the campaign, rather than to continually respond as if you're taking on feedback (and getting more backers as a result) and then ignore it in implementation.

As I noted, I've sold my pledge so will shoot you a message about changing the delivery address, so that you don't have the expense of the send-and-return process. I got a few PMs - it's clear lots of folks love these! I wish you all the best, and hope my honest feedback of your process from being a part of both your campaigns is helpful.

Looking forward to seeing folks fielding armies of these!

 RiTides wrote:
Shieldwolf, as a point of constructive feedback, I'd just like to point out you might want to work on your responses to model critique / feedback. In both if your campaigns, I'm not sure if it's you (Angelos) or Georgios replying... But a ton of text gets typed to "allay any concerns", but the result is almost always "no change".

That's what disappointed me about this - I was so excited to see you finally take feedback, and you continually pointed to this stretch goal for folks asking you to make the last two bodies match two of the originals. I honestly think you're playing it both ways a bit - responding to critiques as if you're taking them onboard, then doing something you'd planned anyway. It would be better in the future to just be more straightforward, it would avoid misunderstandings. As it is now, you're sticking to one thing (rough concept many of us barely noticed, and thought was just that, a concept) and abandoning another (all the communication during the campaign about these torsos meeting the concern people had about the minis). It seems to me that you're using semantics and minimizing some backers you intentionally wooed with this stretch goal, and again to not even address the 5th standard torso (which if done in the original style could please everybody!) is a bummer.

In the end, I want the best for you guys and so have sold my pledge rather than having you ship to me and then pay for a return/refund - as a backer, I really don't want you to have to absorb that. But having backed both your campaigns, I think it's fair to say that all your communication with backers is, in the end, not really influencing your design. This could be very good in some ways - but you would do better to communicate that way during the campaign, rather than to say you are taking on feedback only to toss it aside later, and use semantics to make it sound like the feedback was never out of line with what you created.

Finally, I understand you can't please everyone - but all the more reason to be clear about this during the campaign, rather than to continually respond as if you're taking on feedback (and getting more backers as a result) and then ignore it in implementation.

As I noted, I've sold my pledge so will shoot you a message about changing the delivery address, so that you don't have the expense of the send-and-return process. I got a few PMs - it's clear lots of folks love these! I wish you all the best, and hope my honest feedback of your process from being a part of both your campaigns is helpful.

Looking forward to seeing folks fielding armies of these!

Are you implying that they should change what they're doing because someone typed a lot? Some of us have not been posting openly here but have been communicating with them privately because there are mods here who DO have a dog in this fight and it's been shown repeatedly that when that's the case, posting a different opinion on how something should be does not go well for the other person.
I'm fully behind Shieldwolf's decision and am happy to see that they are considering the direction of their line, their way rather than trying to pander to a few people with overly specific requirements.

@MLaw
The decision of how we will proceed has been taken and communicated, I'm sure @RiTides doesn't hold on anything changing since he has shifted his pledge elsewhere anyway.

@RiTides
pm'ed on what you wrote, posting here would derail the thread, just like @Albertorious who obviously stands behind your point of view but stoppped posting regardless in order to respect our space here :-)

Thanks for the PM - I definitely wish you success here, too, and just wanted to post that publicly as (again hopefully constructive) feedback. Cheers for your great communication!

 Albertorius wrote:

Wehrkind wrote:The poses are not bothering me much. Not super dynamic, but even used individually they are at least in a reasonable pose. They looks like they might be standing comfortably waiting for the big clash to happen, not like perma jumping over a wall or something

Well, the poses don't bother me too much either, not really, but I have two main problems with them (of course, I haven't seen the arms, which I hyope won't all be straightened, so that surely will give them more movement).

The first problem I have with them is that, as they are single piece legs+torsos combination, there are only so many possibilities (although yes, I understant that it allow them to be more natural).

The second problem is that, seeing all the bruhaha with the boobplates and how much has Shieldwolf hammered us with this:

Hi all! (Angelos here)

-The concept artwork shown during the project has to match the final product (and if not match due to tooling issues be at least very close).

...well, it strikes me as somewhat hypocrital to see it bandied so much for that, and so little for this. These are the concept art shown during the project, you know:

-snip-

...and these are what we apparently are getting:
-snip-

...and well, they certainly don't match the concept art all that much. So, if "the concept artwork shown during the project has to match the final product (and if not match due to tooling issues be at least very close)", that should be much closer.

As a last thought, I'm not sure how those poses fit with the ranger parts. I assumed those would be some kind of skirmishers.

I agree, pretty much across the board. I just like the newer poses better, because I got 80 of the girls hoping to rank them up, not so much use them for skirmishes. So some of the more... esoteric?... flamboyant?... special poses are not very valuable to me. I do hope there are some shield/spear combinations that make it look like they are bracing behind their shield and stabbing from behind it, etc. My thought though is that out of the big 20 girl box, I really want to rank up a regiment and if a few get made into skirmish or low count game models I don't mind doing a little extra converting.

On the armor though, it is a little odd to put up pictures of the individual models, shield lords etc, and say "Oh, this is what the others were going to look like". That wasn't really obvious, considering how much variation there is between heroes to begin with, and the simple fact that heroes are by nature more unique. Plus, I didn't go in for lots of extra heroes because I didn't like them as much, so I am a little displeased to find their style has been added to the base pledge in larger doses. I can deal, but then I can make my own models too, so modding a few midriff torsos to be covered up and having different armor styles and producing 40-50 isn't that big of a deal. If that wasn't an option I can definitely see myself being a little less sanguine about things.

Regarding the communication, there is definitely a lot of it, but as RiTides points out the words imply "We are willing to make changes" while the actions and some other words afterwards say "We are doing what we are doing, take it or leave it." I am totally fine with the latter option, I just wish SW was a little more clear on that from the get go. It is one thing to be polite and avoid saying "No, your ideas are stupid, and you are stupid, so we will never listen! EVER!" but another thing to say "Oh yea, we are totally open to feedback and changes people might like to see" when you really mean "If there are any serious deal breakers, let us know, but otherwise we are going to do what we wanted to initially." Even at this point I am not sure that is quite what you are saying, which makes me wonder how much I should be interacting and pledging, compared to say a Reaper KS where the models are the models, and I spend only what I want to spend on stuff as is, with no hope of improving outcomes on some things.
That said, I am glad to hear you are apparently leaving out the trident (bi-dent?) spear thing.

@MLaw: I think your reading of RiTides' post leaves something to be desired in the comprehension department. He is not implying much other than what he openly stated: It seems that SW is saying they are willing to change and tweak a lot more things than they really are. He isn't even complaining about the lack of tweaks, just that their language doesn't create the expectations that would match their actions.

 MLaw wrote:
I'm fully behind Shieldwolf's decision and am happy to see that they are considering the direction of their line, their way rather than trying to pander to a few people with overly specific requirements.

And they do that by pandering to a few other people with overly specific requirements, of course... ah, whatever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wehrkind wrote:
I agree, pretty much across the board. I just like the newer poses better, because I got 80 of the girls hoping to rank them up, not so much use them for skirmishes. So some of the more... esoteric?... flamboyant?... special poses are not very valuable to me. I do hope there are some shield/spear combinations that make it look like they are bracing behind their shield and stabbing from behind it, etc. My thought though is that out of the big 20 girl box, I really want to rank up a regiment and if a few get made into skirmish or low count game models I don't mind doing a little extra converting.

That's a perfectly understandable position. As I said, I'm not overly bothered by it. It's just that I'd have preferred them to be a tad more dynamic.

EDIT: But as I said, Shieldwolf has already made their decision, and there's no need for more arguing. Some people will get what they wanted and some people will not. That's life for ya.

"Willing to accept your feedback" does not automatically mean "willing to act on it".

I haven't followed this whole thing, but it seems Shieldwolf laid out their reasons for not taking the feedback on board this time quite well.

~Eric

Taarnak, I totally agree - they've laid it out really, really clearly here, and I have no issue with them moving forward in that direction. The only point of constructive criticism I wanted to make was that, during the campaign, at least some of us understood their communication about the aesthetic and purpose of these alternate parts differently (and is there anything they could do differently in that regard in the future). They are definitely free to pursue whatever direction they like!

Hopefully, that is an easy fix to make for future campaigns - and again, honestly wishing them all the best with this one, and in the future!

 Taarnak wrote:
"Willing to accept your feedback" does not automatically mean "willing to act on it".

I haven't followed this whole thing, but it seems Shieldwolf laid out their reasons for not taking the feedback on board this time quite well.

~Eric

That's true, but it does imply that some feedback will be acted upon, generally more than a small amount. The extreme cases are "You tell us stuff, we act on nothing" which is functionally equivalent to "We do not accept any feedback", and then "We do whatever anyone who posts online tells us to do" which is way too much attention to feedback. During the campaign they sounded closer to the latter, more likely to act on feedback side of things, and now in practice they are more towards the "We don't really accept feedback" end. Really, either is fine, it is just nicer when people are more upfront about it. I might have waited for a retail release on this KS if I knew the real version was going to be more like "We are making something, and it will be what we want without regard to the customer preferences." Or at least I would have invested less. Its always a risk that a KS won't result in the things you want, but with the company accepting feedback it makes it seem more likely, especially when they say something like "We hear your feedback and are making it a stretch goal."

ArtIsGreat wrote:
Ha, some people won't be happy until they put female heads on male bodies, furious and appalled at any hint of female form. In a fantasy setting :-)

If this is aimed at me, I believe you are mistaking my frugality and converting addiction with some rather extreme gender politics. I chose Men at Arms because they have rather androgynous torsos lacking the masculine V-shape and GBP because they are heroically scaled to the point of cartoon shapelessness, but armored. Keira Nightly types...or maybe more Dorothy Patrillo. Using the spare heads and a more regular, armored kit to good result would make me feel less silly assembling a few bare-bellied crazies asking to be gutted. At least I'll have half a box worth of armored, shapely women, a quarter box with more elite types, and a few sculpted cuirass heroines if the boob plate can pass as such. If not, then some time-traveling cosplayers.

It's not unusual to try to match up Shielwolf's kits with compatible parts. After all, their Mountain Orcs' waist and wrist joints are perfectly interchangeable with Avatars of War's Dwarf Berserkers'.

I'd been waiting to see that! Thank you!

What did you call it? "Reverse Mantic Trollism" or something along those lines?

 highlord tamburlaine wrote:
I'd been waiting to see that! Thank you!

What did you call it? "Reverse Mantic Trollism" or something along those lines?

I forget. But it definitely included the word "Mantic".

A scale shot.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

ArtIsGreat wrote:
Ha, some people won't be happy until they put female heads on male bodies, furious and appalled at any hint of female form. In a fantasy setting :-)

If this is aimed at me, I believe you are mistaking my frugality and converting addiction with some rather extreme gender politics. I chose Men at Arms because they have rather androgynous torsos lacking the masculine V-shape and GBP because they are heroically scaled to the point of cartoon shapelessness, but armored. Keira Nightly types...or maybe more Dorothy Patrillo. Using the spare heads and a more regular, armored kit to good result would make me feel less silly assembling a few bare-bellied crazies asking to be gutted. At least I'll have half a box worth of armored, shapely women, a quarter box with more elite types, and a few sculpted cuirass heroines if the boob plate can pass as such. If not, then some time-traveling cosplayers.

It is funny, though, how wanting coherent garments for a certain activity is almost always equated with "not being happy until they put female heads on male bodies, furious and appalled at any hint of female form". As if, for some reason, having the guts unprotected is the sensible thing to do in the situation, or something...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
EDIT: Oh even hours later it just appends >_>
Oh, actual question for Shieldwolf: sprues!

What is finally going to be included in the Shieldmaiden boxes with the Silver and Gold rewards?

So far I know for certain that there will be:
- 20 regular bodies and backs (4 of which have been previewed already)
- a number of armored bodies from the "non-bare midriff" SG
- Command Group upgrades (they said 2 per box, IIRC)
- Ranger parts (weaponry/back torsos/heads)

So, that's fact. Now, assumptions:
- Given that the "non-bare midriff" was (partly, it turns out) made to address the fact that people didn't want to use the bare midridd bodies, I'm assuming there should be enough per box to substitute them. So either 8 or 12?
- Command Group's SG says "enough to make two CGs per box", so I'm assuming here two banners, 2 musicians and 2 champions parts bundles.
- Rangers: the SG says "new bits in order to create a dual kit of Shieldmaiden Rangers", so I'm assuming... 20 of each, at least, to be able to build a full unit out of the box?

I'm not sure how on the money I'm on this, tbh. Also, other than that, we don't know what will exactly be there on the prue: how many heads, and non-wavy heads? How many arms/weapons/weapon configurations? Shields? etc.

Are the sprues layout more or less finalized as of now, in which case you'll probably be able to give definite numbers, or are they still being worked on?

Thanks in advance for any info.

Best if we stick to the topic at hand indeed.

Thanks.

I love the chainmal vest on the second gal from the left. Visually interesting, a tunic beneath for cold weather and fantasy-ish/"sexy" without being comical.

Since that is the 5th torso who probably won't show up I hope it the design in another model/kit.

 Albertorius wrote:
Oh, actual question for Shieldwolf: sprues!

What is finally going to be included in the Shieldmaiden boxes with the Silver and Gold rewards?

So far I know for certain that there will be:
- 20 regular bodies and backs (4 of which have been previewed already)
- a number of armored bodies from the "non-bare midriff" SG
- Command Group upgrades (they said 2 per box, IIRC)
- Ranger parts (weaponry/back torsos/heads)

So, that's fact.

Facts:
-20 front torsos in each box (2 different "non-bare" midriff + 2 different bare midriff, all 4 of which shown on update #26)
-2 "non-bare" midriff SG ( in each box, the ones voted on and shown on update #26)
-Command Group ugrades, 2 in each box (affirmative)
-Rangers parts (we will add some crossbows/capes/hooded heads to make this into a dual kit, affirmative)

 Albertorius wrote:

Now, assumptions:
- Given that the "non-bare midriff" was (partly, it turns out) made to address the fact that people didn't want to use the bare midridd bodies, I'm assuming there should be enough per box to substitute them. So either 8 or 12?
- Command Group's SG says "enough to make two CGs per box", so I'm assuming here two banners, 2 musicians and 2 champions parts bundles.
- Rangers: the SG says "new bits in order to create a dual kit of Shieldmaiden Rangers", so I'm assuming... 20 of each, at least, to be able to build a full unit out of the box?

-The "non-bare" midriff SG was created for people wanting more practical armor, you assume correct that there will be enough bodies/torsos to substitute the "bare-midriff" versions. This means that if the 5th torso on the main sprue does not fit you are looking at having 5 of each type on each box. The needle currently points that the 5th torso will not fit.
-Correct. On top of that we are trying to "break" the banner in half in order to provide an additional 2 spears in each box (we will see how that works out).
-Partially correct. 20 crossbows, 20 capes (in order to provide a uniform look on the troops) and some hooded heads, number of which has not been decided on yet. You can rest assured we are not going to tool/place the same item and multiple them 10 times on the sprues, we are stretching this to provide a large number of combinations from the same kit making sure it's second to none. :-)

 Albertorius wrote:

I'm not sure how on the money I'm on this, tbh. Also, other than that, we don't know what will exactly be there on the prue: how many heads, and non-wavy heads? How many arms/weapons/weapon configurations? Shields? etc.
Are the sprues layout more or less finalized as of now, in which case you'll probably be able to give definite numbers, or are they still being worked on?

Nope, it is being worked on, the masters being delayed sure doesn't help us speed this up.
Weapons and shields we are not in grade to say with certainty right now, 5-6 for each is the main plan however. A couple of bits too in order to customize more. With the unlocked SG heads we are looking at 16-17 different head sculpts who should be available from a minimum of two to a maximum of three times per box (for a minimum total of 32-34 heads in the first case and 48-51 heads in the second case). The needle currently points to the second case.

 Albertorius wrote:
Thanks in advance for any info.

You are welcome :-)


@Binabik15
The 5th torso was halted at WiP, it has not been shown yet. All 6 torsos we have shown till now on update #26 are all going on the sprues, any additional items (e.g. more shields, more heads, more weapons etc) we will have to work out and decide. The torso however is too big and we knew and told from the start it's going to be hard to fit in. Until final lay-out has been decided, we prefer being upfront and saying it will not fit since chances ar it will not, but if id does fit, then that's going to be a nice surprise for everyone involved... :-)

Thank you, that was very informative

Hmm, if I'm reading this right, it basically means you will be able to build 30 minis per KS box... that is a whole lot of minis, and really great value.

 Albertorius wrote:
Thank you, that was very informative

Hmm, if I'm reading this right, it basically means you will be able to build 30 minis per KS box... that is a whole lot of minis, and really great value.

The box doesn't have 30 "complete" models, but with a little GS work or kitbaching from various other kits (we would reccomend Citadel Miniatures kits as they will probably fit our quality and scale) people should be able to get to that number, yes.
That's also the reason we shake our heads here at Shieldwolf HQ when we read "I have 80 of them coming!" since they are referring to pledges consisting of 4 boxes. But, if they want to add some conversion work, and assuming they haven't pledged for a Mammoth + howdah (where an additional 8-10 models will be included!) then that's not 80, more like 120. And to that we will have to add another 4-5 models of the free srpue SG at 500 backers.
Don't forget that Angelos was adding his own money to make this a great experience and a great deal.

Yeah, try adding another 15K which we never reached for another 40 free Warmaiden models SG and go figure...

I don't know how many folks will be able to convert the missing backs, but that is still great. I'm looking forward to seeing the actual sprues and what really makes it onto them (when the time comes, of course).

 RiTides wrote:
I don't know how many folks will be able to convert the missing backs, but that is still great.

We are looking into how we can have enough backs to avoid the need for conversions. Once we get a clear idea of the final lay-out we will be able to make a better decision :-)

 Shieldwolf Miniatures wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
I don't know how many folks will be able to convert the missing backs, but that is still great.

We are looking into how we can have enough backs to avoid the need for conversions. Once we get a clear idea of the final lay-out we will be able to make a better decision :-)

I think that the amount of green stuff sculpting needed to fill in the backs would be minimal if I choose to then cover the back with one of the included capes or shields. That's what I'm going to try to do.

 Shieldwolf Miniatures wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
Thank you, that was very informative

Hmm, if I'm reading this right, it basically means you will be able to build 30 minis per KS box... that is a whole lot of minis, and really great value.

The box doesn't have 30 "complete" models, but with a little GS work or kitbaching from various other kits (we would reccomend Citadel Miniatures kits as they will probably fit our quality and scale) people should be able to get to that number, yes.
That's also the reason we shake our heads here at Shieldwolf HQ when we read "I have 80 of them coming!" since they are referring to pledges consisting of 4 boxes. But, if they want to add some conversion work, and assuming they haven't pledged for a Mammoth + howdah (where an additional 8-10 models will be included!) then that's not 80, more like 120. And to that we will have to add another 4-5 models of the free srpue SG at 500 backers.
Don't forget that Angelos was adding his own money to make this a great experience and a great deal.

Yeah, try adding another 15K which we never reached for another 40 free Warmaiden models SG and go figure...

The value is absolutely great, I don't think anyone could possibly complain about that in good faith.

If I understand correctly how the pieces work, though, the ranger capes have the back pieces, right? If so, you really can do 30 per box with no gs or kitbash whatsoever (and if that's not the case the render of the armored gal with the cape is confusing :p). Anyways, great value. Have you thought about doing an "all backs" bundle, maybe with resin additional backs or something, so that those of your backers not so gifted with kitbashing could build the extra shielmaidens with a relatively small additional expense?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Shieldwolf Miniatures wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
I don't know how many folks will be able to convert the missing backs, but that is still great.

We are looking into how we can have enough backs to avoid the need for conversions. Once we get a clear idea of the final lay-out we will be able to make a better decision :-)

I think that the amount of green stuff sculpting needed to fill in the backs would be minimal if I choose to then cover the back with one of the included capes or shields. That's what I'm going to try to do.

Yep. From the looks of it, you'd probably only need a gs ball for that.