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.

Well, since the original question is disrespectful, allow me to be brutally honest...

I look at 100% GW, in-print, unconverted armies the same way I look at a bare plastic gunline.
The entire point of the game IMO is to inject your own personality and imagination into the army you build.

If you only feel comfortable playing an out of box cookie cutter army you most likely have a deficit in skill, creativity, or personality.

Of course they don't detract from the hobby. That's a nonsensical argument, made not out of any true conviction, but a desire to start a fight.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Of course they don't detract from the hobby. That's a nonsensical argument, made not out of any true conviction, but a desire to start a fight.

I like the way you call him a troll in all but name.

 Desubot wrote:


A sherman is a sherman and it looks like a sherman which we know is a sherman and it being in the year 40k certainly breaks immersion.

And a land raider looking like WWI british tank or the russ as wwII tank doesn't?

Makumba wrote:

 Desubot wrote:


A sherman is a sherman and it looks like a sherman which we know is a sherman and it being in the year 40k certainly breaks immersion.

And a land raider looking like WWI british tank or the russ as wwII tank doesn't?

I Certainly dont recall seeing a WW1 british tank with LASERS!
or a Sherman with a cannon that shoots shells bigger than artillery.


also with more lasers.

Its honestly not even close.

So you're rejecting a model's eligibility as counts-as on the basis of the calibre of it's barrels?

You sure you're not just arguing that alt models are fine unless you think they aren't....?

 Azreal13 wrote:
So you're rejecting a model's eligibility as counts-as on the basis of the calibre of it's barrels?

You sure you're not just arguing that alt models are fine unless you think they aren't....?

No Im saying a Land raider doesnt look like a WW1 Tank

nor does a sherman look like a russ

Im also not saying i would never play with some one that uses these models

what i AM saying is that it does break immersion from the 40k universe as i can imperially say that what i am looking at is a sherman.

you aut to stop assuming what im thinking.

This is a squad of my guardsmen. If I want to make my mixed male/female regiment I have no choice but to seek 3rd party models for my female guardsmen. The guns aren't perfect, and if I had better modelling skill, I'd probably replace them with lasguns. But if these are 'too immersion breaking' then I don't know what to say. (I'd have used the Victoria miniatures had they existed when I bought these, and I'll still probably get them at some point.)

Your pictures are a bit dark :/

FYI get the Victoria ones they are nice.

Yeah, I only have my cell phone camera, which isn't great, and I don't have a great setup for taking pictures either. This one was just quickly slapped together to give an idea of what they look like.

 Desubot wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
So you're rejecting a model's eligibility as counts-as on the basis of the calibre of it's barrels?

You sure you're not just arguing that alt models are fine unless you think they aren't....?

No Im saying a Land raider doesnt look like a WW1 Tank

nor does a sherman look like a russ

Im also not saying i would never play with some one that uses these models

what i AM saying is that it does break immersion from the 40k universe as i can imperially say that what i am looking at is a sherman.

you aut to stop assuming what im thinking.

I think... you are saying you can see why someone doesnt like it because some models dont fit your idea of 40k fitting. Like a sherman. Or the dreamforge soldiers.

Its not that you dont like, but that you dont see them as very 40k looking...

To me it seemed like you just didnt like some models.

 Desubot wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
So you're rejecting a model's eligibility as counts-as on the basis of the calibre of it's barrels?

You sure you're not just arguing that alt models are fine unless you think they aren't....?

No Im saying a Land raider doesnt look like a WW1 Tank

you aut to stop assuming what im thinking.

I did phrase it as a question, not a normal indicator of an assumption, more of a challenge.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Snip

Yeah thats true. sry for the tone.

Anyway

What im saying and litterally what i am saying is that.
I feel that some proxied/converted/countsas/3rdparty armies in my honest opinion look so out of place that it breaks my immersion when im playing my game as per the original topic

Yeah, a bunch of green army men wouldn't be something that I'd appreciate seeing on the table too often. Although using them to see if the real model is worth buying would get a pass for a bit.

What if they were painted and based?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
[No Im saying a Land raider doesnt look like a WW1 Tank

That one of those...venerable Land Raiders?

 Azreal13 wrote:
What if they were painted and based?

Well like i said its about the immersion. i guess its hard for everyone to understand but

When i take the time to play/make a list and everything. even in pick up games i try to picture it as a real battle. like a game of DOW.

Suddenly i find my imperial fists fighting Starwars imperial storm troopers and now its more like playing some kinda supersmash game.

I can still appreciate the conversion and everything and heck i think a army like that would be cool

And i enjoy both DOW and SS, but it doesn't feel like DOW at some point ya know? and as per the OT i do feel it takes away from the game. (in specific cases. like fighting a bunch of xeno morphs. instead of nids)

Edit: at Zande That figurse

Nearly 12 months on and you're making the same threads.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/582240.page

 Accolade wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
[No Im saying a Land raider doesnt look like a WW1 Tank

That one of those...venerable Land Raiders?

Wow I didn't know leman russes looked identical to WW1 tanks. Matches my vostroyan Cossack theme even better!

Makumba wrote:
Well GW itself said that people that sold their stuff cheaper were stealing from them. So those that buy cheaper models made or not made by GW are buying stolen goods.

Luckily GW don't get to define the concept of theft. If what you are saying is true then GW probably shouldn't be selling there models to people who sell them on.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I'm sorry but when I see Dreamforce dreadknights, colonial historical miniatures, and tier things if the like I just can't stand playing against them. I feel they don't fit the 40k aesthetic and are a cheap way into cheating what the hobby is. People spend not only time building and painting their mans, but time earning the money to buy the actual product. Those third part miniatures is kind of insulting to the people who saved for the real thing. What do you guys think?

I think that's quite silly.

To me at least the only thing that matters is if everything is the right size, it's easy to tell what the miniatures are/what they represent, and whether or not they look good.

If someone chooses to not buy Games Workshop miniatures, or to use a certain brand of third-party miniatures, or to hand-sculpt their miniatures, or whatever, that's all cool. It's about the effort they put in making their army, not the amount of money they forked over to get their plastic or what brand they used. And really, a good amount of that third party stuff costs as much or more than GW.

As for the "aesthetic" thing, Warhammer has a pretty wide range of aesthetics. And what if someone made something exclusively out of GW bits that didn't match your perception of the "warhammer aesthetic"? Would you refuse to play against them then?

You have every right to begrudge stuff and refuse to play against whoever you want, but I don't think it's a proper attitude for a real hobbyist. GW is hardly all-encompassing in the hobby after all, and nobody wants to play against a spoilsport.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
What do you guys think?

I think you're doing a good job of stirring the pot.

I own a DreamForge Games Leviathan Crusader, and have played it as a Titan. It is a fantastic model, and it looks great. It matches well with the Grey Knights aesthetic. It is dramatically larger and better than any GW Dreadknight, and suggesting otherwise is the height of ignorance.

I have converted several vehicles, some very heavy conversions, such as my Hellhounds, Hydra, closed-top Basilisk, etc. Also, heavy conversion Defilers. All of those conversions required a lot more time and effort compared to a stock GW kit. Saying that they somehow devalue a game, when the original 40k vehicles were all pure scratchbuilds, is completely ludicrous.

As for earning the money, take a good look at my signature. I can literally field 100s of models, dozens of vehicles. My Guard, Inquisition, Eldar and Fantasy armies are basically all metal infantry. I choose to convert and buy 3rd party, because I want my army to look a certain way.

and yeah I find it odd that people complain about using real world tanks because many 40k tanks are based of real ones.

 Desubot wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
What about them looks nothing like in the fluff? They are humans with guns. Thats a guardsmen. In fact they dont even need to ave a gun... or be human. That is the fluff. Not some cop out.

Its the generic sci fi armor. They are humes with guns and armor that looks right out of halo or infinity. There are aesthetic choices even in fluff and the 40k universe is dominated by gothic styles.

Do you have the early Imperial Guard Codices? If so, there is a multi-page spread of various Imperial Guard regiments wearing a wide variety of equipment for a wide variety of technology levels. The Imperial Guard is canonically very diverse, and this is supported by decades of Fluff. DreamForge infantry could definitely stand in as Guardsmen from a very high-tech world.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
. DreamForge infantry could definitely stand in as Guardsmen from a very high-tech world.

If it was just a matter of the armour, sure. But they're all out of scale for 40K as well.

I mean, GW aren't particularly consistent with scale to begin with, but the Dreamforge guys, as nice as they are, just push the bounds a little too far for my taste.

I don't care as long as it's a 40k model. If you proxy with a coke can or your warmuhurdes minies then I start to mind.

 insaniak wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
. DreamForge infantry could definitely stand in as Guardsmen from a very high-tech world.

If it was just a matter of the armour, sure. But they're all out of scale for 40K as well.

I mean, GW aren't particularly consistent with scale to begin with, but the Dreamforge guys, as nice as they are, just push the bounds a little too far for my taste.

OK, posit a low gravity high tech Imperial world, resulting in extra-tall humans / ab-humans.

There are some pretty good Warmachine minis that work well as death cult assassins, better than the GW ones in my opinion.

Compare the Daughters of the flame side by side with the Death Cult assassins:



The one official Death Cultist doesn't even have the two swords that they are all supposed to have, and the poses are identical, even if there are superficial differences between the clothing of the two. The Daughters have four unique poses, and don't look like S&M fetishists, while still keeping close enough to the 40k aesthetic that they don't look out of place.

 Boggy Man wrote:
Well, since the original question is disrespectful, allow me to be brutally honest...

I look at 100% GW, in-print, unconverted armies the same way I look at a bare plastic gunline.
The entire point of the game IMO is to inject your own personality and imagination into the army you build.

If you only feel comfortable playing an out of box cookie cutter army you most likely have a deficit in skill, creativity, or personality.

As someone who has an army of both Kriegsmen and Scions who are 100% GW, Find a better way to express this last sentiment. Something along the lines of "I disagree" would be good, motyak

So many "Unseen" Mechs from Battletech (RDF side) are coming back unto the table top for Robotech Tactics...getting to a point now of re-interest in Battletech. Someone seriously thinking on making a run on Ebay for the Unseen (not me)