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.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
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.

Yea I am disgusted to my core to know think that poor people try to play this game. Third party miniatures is for nothing but dirty communists. We must keep the plebeians out of the game and keep it only for the pure hardworking rich. I mean, even though people could be born with a lot of money and not have needed to save...


Oh woops wait this is a troll, I'll see miself out.

I would have to wonder if the OP feels trod upon if he encounters someone who can field an entire 2K points army of GW figures after working for, like, three hours.

Pssh, I can buy a Warhound in my sleep!

OK, seriously folks, time to stop and have a good, hard look at yourselves.

Contentious topics only turn into troll-fests if people let them go that way. Spend more time (politely!) discussing the topic and less time examining the motivations of those starting them, and we wouldn't have to waste so much time deleting nonsense.

@insaniak The OP is a troll though, this thread had no other purpose. Over 50% of the threads he make get locked. He is the common denominator.

 Zande4 wrote:
@insaniak The OP is a troll though, this thread had no other purpose.

The OP's reasons (whatever they may be) for starting a thread have no bearing on whether or not people responding to that thread should follow the rules of the site.

If we feel that a thread is genuinely unlikely to generate reasonable discussion, we'll lock it. This one wasn't locked because it's an interesting topic of discussion... provided people stick to the actual discussion.

Over 50% of the threads he make get locked.

No they don't.

And it wouldn't matter if they did. Fewer of them would get locked if they weren't filled with people complaining about who they were staretd by instead of sticking to the topic.

I think the OP needs a reality check.

I'm actually planning an IG army using austro hungarian ww1 models. They will cost more than the IG would... but it fits my theme of the world I invented for my IG to live on.

Why should my fun detract from your fun?

Thanks
Austin

I'd use third-party models more myself, but I have a hell of a time remembering (sometimes even figuring out) what's gonna count as each different weapon when I start looking at miniatures online. Swords and axes and maces and shields are easy enough, but then you get into different types of special and heavy weapons from other sci-fi stuff that seem to have little visual analogue to 40k weapons.

And then I start to feel like using non-40k models to play 40k with just doesn't feel authentic to the setting. It'd be like playing a Star Wars game with miniatures of Redshirts or SG teams or infantry armed with powerguns. It feels weird to say, "Okay, and this squad fires their boltguns, flamer, and meltagun..." when those models clearly are not armed with those weapons. It's the same feeling I get when I try to use my not-Celestine model. I always call her Celestine, because it's the Celestine model (slightly modified), using the Celestine rules, and it feels weird to not call her that just because the bits of fanfiction I wrote involve a character who was specifically built-up to be a replacement for Celestine.

Edit: But that's just me. I don't pretend that other people feel the same way I do, and if anyone else enjoys using third-party models, that's fine. I wouldn't refuse a game on those grounds. Naturally I'd expect that things should look like what they represent in the rules, but that's just common sense. (I mean things like power armored infantry clearly wearing some form of heavy plate armor, APCs looking like they can carry infantry inside them, etc.)

I love third party models since in my opinion GWS aesthetics have been on the decline. I think it's really hard to say with a straight face that Vic's minis aren't better on every level than are stock Cadians.

So far as the other stuff, I am strict rule of cool. If you want to use those Robowhatever toys (I forget the real name) as Orky Buggies or what have you, and you made the effort to actually convert and paint them, that's terrific!

The only place I would draw the line is when the model being used is not a appropriate proxy, such as the Dreamforge Leviathan as a Warhound. I love the Leviathan and think it's a great model and would play it as a substitute for a Knight, or using homegrown rules with VDR or whatever, but it's just not the right size and dimensions to proxy as a Warhound - stuff like that. I don't want to see unarmored-human-scale minis as Terminators, that kind of thing.

Rule of cool, whatever looks awesome and is approximately the right size, I am down with.

 Pouncey wrote:
I'd use third-party models more myself, but I have a hell of a time remembering (sometimes even figuring out) what's gonna count as each different weapon when I start looking at miniatures online. Swords and axes and maces and shields are easy enough, but then you get into different types of special and heavy weapons from other sci-fi stuff that seem to have little visual analogue to 40k weapons.

And then I start to feel like using non-40k models to play 40k with just doesn't feel authentic to the setting. It'd be like playing a Star Wars game with miniatures of Redshirts or SG teams or infantry armed with powerguns. It feels weird to say, "Okay, and this squad fires their boltguns, flamer, and meltagun..." when those models clearly are not armed with those weapons. It's the same feeling I get when I try to use my not-Celestine model. I always call her Celestine, because it's the Celestine model (slightly modified), using the Celestine rules, and it feels weird to not call her that just because the bits of fanfiction I wrote involve a character who was specifically built-up to be a replacement for Celestine.

It's because GW has you in their grips.

If you say to your opponent at the beginning of the game "okay, all those chaps with henry-martinis have lasguns, the guy with the pistol has a las pistol, and the guy pointing has a flamer" he'd say "okay, sounds good."

It's that easy
It's not cheating the system
It's not un-authentic
It's a way to match the theme you've laid out for your army.

If you don't do cooky themes, fine, some of us do.
We, (atleast I) always ask if I can use proxies before the game even starts.

Thanks
Austin

 Redbad wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I'd use third-party models more myself, but I have a hell of a time remembering (sometimes even figuring out) what's gonna count as each different weapon when I start looking at miniatures online. Swords and axes and maces and shields are easy enough, but then you get into different types of special and heavy weapons from other sci-fi stuff that seem to have little visual analogue to 40k weapons.

And then I start to feel like using non-40k models to play 40k with just doesn't feel authentic to the setting. It'd be like playing a Star Wars game with miniatures of Redshirts or SG teams or infantry armed with powerguns. It feels weird to say, "Okay, and this squad fires their boltguns, flamer, and meltagun..." when those models clearly are not armed with those weapons. It's the same feeling I get when I try to use my not-Celestine model. I always call her Celestine, because it's the Celestine model (slightly modified), using the Celestine rules, and it feels weird to not call her that just because the bits of fanfiction I wrote involve a character who was specifically built-up to be a replacement for Celestine.

It's because GW has you in their grips.

If you say to your opponent at the beginning of the game "okay, all those chaps with henry-martinis have lasguns, the guy with the pistol has a las pistol, and the guy pointing has a flamer" he'd say "okay, sounds good."

It's that easy
It's not cheating the system
It's not un-authentic
It's a way to match the theme you've laid out for your army.

If you don't do cooky themes, fine, some of us do.
We, (atleast I) always ask if I can use proxies before the game even starts.

Thanks
Austin

Yeah, see, I play Sisters of Battle. IG have tons of great analogues. Nuns with guns and power armor... not quite so much.

The weird part of my discomfort with using third-party models is that I only ever play at home, against my mom, who is totally okay using third party models and loves it when I kitbash and convert stuff. (I also started on a line of scalie guardsmen with Cadian models. I was gonna use Forge World Death Korps models instead, but then I was looking at them and figured the rebreathers would be too much of a pain to deal with to get the heads on, and at best I'd have tubes running up to the neck and just suddenly stop. Plus most of my IG are already Cadians.)

Though I do use some Reaper Miniatures stuff as Crusaders for my Battle Conclave. Primarily since I wanted an all-female army. Also have a modified cowgirl to use as a Uriah proxy.

I don't deny that GW has me in their grips as much as Blizzard does. Been playing WH40k off and on for 13 years, and WoW for 7 1/2.

 Ouze wrote:
The only place I would draw the line is when the model being used is not a appropriate proxy, such as the Dreamforge Leviathan as a Warhound. I love the Leviathan and think it's a great model and would play it as a substitute for a Knight, or using homegrown rules with VDR or whatever, but it's just not the right size and dimensions to proxy as a Warhound - stuff like that.

Rule of cool, whatever looks awesome and is approximately the right size, I am down with.

The DFG Leviathan is significantly bulkier and larger than a Knight. It is nearly identical in size to an Armorcast Warhound. If the classic beetleback Warhound is a Warhound, then the DFG Leviathan can play as such. Plus, Rule of Cool is on the Leviathan's side -- it's a seriously cool kit!

Something something weapon loadout

 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?

your first and main example makes it so easy for me to disagree with you since dreamforge leviathans are vastly superior to the slowed looking baby carrier abomination that GW produces. even the name sucks dreadknight lol.

I don't see a problem with it, especially when there is a theme behind it. A friend of mine has an Imperial Guard army with models (unsure of the range or company) that look like the bad guys from Killzone, its a sick looking army. I feel that as long as they are using models that are reasonable close in both size and represent the weapon and armor well I will have no issue. I hated when GW went with the "our models only" approach when before it used to be just 50% of the model had to be GW, made for a lot of great conversion pieces and armies. Also, GW is partly at fault here for not expanding their miniature line to include certain things like armor patterns, different IG Regiments, ect.

 gmaleron wrote:
GW is partly at fault here for not expanding their miniature line to include certain things like armor patterns, different IG Regiments, ect.

Once upon a time, GW sold the following IG regiments:
- Armageddon Steel Legion
- Atillan Rough Riders
- Cadians
- Catachan Jungle Fighters
- Mordian Guard
- Praetorian Guard
- Tallarn Desert Raiders
- Tanith
- Valhallan Warriors
- Vostroyan

Plus
- Adeptus Arbites
- Stormtroopers

Plus FW
- Elysian Drop Troops
- Death Korps of Krieg

Plus RT-era plastics as
- Necromunda Spiders

Plus
- units represented in Last Chancers.

3E was a hell of a time!

 carlos13th wrote:
and yeah I find it odd that people complain about using real world tanks because many 40k tanks are based of real ones.

One of the reasons the GW designers make Sci-fi tanks is they can loosely base them around real world designs they like, but don't have to worry about the minutia of detail and instead can modify the designs by rule of cool. They think if a realworld design isn't an exact, scaled down replica the risk of nerdrage is too high!

So although there is some basis on real world tanks for the 40k models, they have been modified to fit aesthetic and weaponry of the 41st Millennium. I'd have no problem with someone basing their vehicle around a real world tank so long as they make it fit 40k.

Some third party miniatures put GW to shame

Here's an example: Khorne Lord on Bloodcrusher?

This is one of those rare times where I'm going to jump to GW's defense. I'll take GW's Khorne Lord on Jugger any day of the week. That model is 200% solid ace, and one of my favorite of all time from any company.


The above model has a great paint job, but the rider is very 2-dimensional, with a pose like an early 90's miniature, and proportions out of World of Warcraft. Not a bad mini, but I don't think it holds a candle to GW's Juggerlord.

Privateer's models do have a rather distinctive aesthetic, and it's not for everyone. I like both, but for different reasons.

Removed by insaniak. Please see Dakka's Rule #1

Well given if you want non male guard, 3rd party only.

You only have cadian, catchan in plastic.

Death korps and such in resin, rest are older metals.

The guard range is not huge, highlanders, colonial style, so many great alternative designs. And given guard is so vast no one pattern fits all. So fluff wise its correct

Okay Khorne-boy may not be to everyones taste, but how about...





Compare that to a GW marine and I know which I would choose

You make a hard sell Wulfmar, it is indeed nice looking, if I were to get more SM it would probably be those minus some of the Tac. bits. Hmmmm maybe for a Deathwatch Sternguard...

Maybe for a 30k army.

But until then GK PAGK models still look damn good for their role.

I find that some models provided by recasters have way better quality than original GW ones. Same with 3-d party. And conversions are undoubtfully a good thing.

I can kind of see where the OP is coming from, although I think I feel a bit less strongly about it than him.

I only use GW bits in my 40k armies. I have models from other ranges but I don't mix them. But I wouldn't mind if someone wanted to use reaper ninjas to represent Death Cult Assassins or something like that.

However, I used to love Lego when I was a kid. One Christmas someone got me some Mega Blocks...

@OP: No, wholeheartedly, the opposite in my opinion. Something which allows for more individuality in a creative hobby is a positive thing.

3rd party models allow for some things that are difficult to achieve by sticking strictly to the GW range. eg.I want to give my wolf guard fur cloaks. The problem is there is only one such piece on the SW pack sprue. So naturally I'm going to source ones from elsewhere instead of having to give all my wolf guard an identical cloak. Another is 5 sets of kneeling legs I need. The ones produced by Kromlech are better and more varied than the single piece GW make. In short I'm not going to restrict my modelling options because GW haven't catered for them. And that's not a criticism of GW, I'm actually pleased enough with what comes in most boxes. It just isn't always enough or a converter.

Regarding conversions As a hobbyist, there are things I like a lot about space marines and things that I don't. e.g. the oversize shoulder pads, which I flle down. I also find the backpacks boring so I replace them with more modern combat packs. Converting allows me to change these things from an aesthetic that annoys me to one I like. I collect the hobby to entertain myself, not appease others. If other players think my canvas backpacks mar the 40k universe then -respectfully- that's their tough luck!

I also agree with the OP to an extent. However I will never refuse to play a person using 3rd party stuff or or conversion's that someone has made to fit the 40k theme.

Where I draw the line however is playing against armies full of a mish-mash of 3rd party models and quick conversions for the sole sake of it being cheap. To clarify, I have seen people flip a disposable coffee cup upside-down and glue fins on it and try and tell me it was a drop pod company logo and all on it simply because he didn't want to buy any drop pods to play a drop pod army. Add to that paper craft models, little green army men and people just throwing various random mini's together and calling it an army without even a hint of trying to tie it together.

So yeah.....sometimes 3rd party mini's and conversions can feel insulting even if you have some 3rd party mini's yourself simply because they put no effort into it and happily brag about using literal garbage as models.


Edit: Also @ thegreatchimp in fairness, space marine backpacks are not combat packs full of storage....they are mini-nuclear reactors designed to power that hulking suit of power armor Just throwing that out there in defense of the classic marine backpack (though the conversions sounds quite cool so keep it up)

There's certainly arguments to be made either way.

I've seen some green-stuff projects floating around the web that look absolutely fantastic and definitely should be usable. I also can't fault people for things like sticking lady heads on imperial troops.

On the other hand, stuff bought elsewhere does effectively take away from GW. Some may see this as a positive, but it does contribute, in a small way, to the decline of the IP. So long as GW actually produces that product, that is. Stuff like lady heads and the like take nothing from them. Though, when making that leap, one could always inform GW of that decision. Might make them see some potential profit... Anyway, I get the whole support the company thing. I like supporting the company. They've been cool with me.

So... case-by-case basis?

My Eldar are all GW bits. Not because I think its 'right', but because I haven't seen 3rd party bits that I wanted to use yet. Either the aesthetic is wrong, or the quality isn't what I want. But if I saw a bit I wanted somewhere else, I'd use it.

On the other hand, many of the best Ork armies have mixes of GW and non-GW bits. None of the good ones seem to be assembled as intended. I mean, Orkz! It just works better that way.

A guy showed up with all non-GW models. They looked great. Decently armored and geared. Well modelled futuristic soldiers. They didn't feel 'right' when he fielded them as Marines, as Marines have certain equipment/vehicles. But they made an amazing IG elite force. Or using Marine rules to play counts-as a renegade system's elite soldiers.

I think this is what some people are referring to when talking about a Sherman in 40k. The feel has to be right. I doubt they'd prefer an Empire Steamtank instead, despite being GW. They're seeing the Sherman and thinking WW2, not 40k. Much like using SW Storm Troopers or Transformers. But I doubt they'd have a problem with nodded T72s with some futuristic bits. They've probably just had bad experiences with people who are more proxying than custom modelling.

(That said, while the Leman Russ is a specific tank/armed-and-armored-tractor, the rules for LRs actually cover most IG battle tanks, which are very diverse. In some forces, they really will take a heavy industry vehicle and bolt on arms/armor)

It's really about constant themes. No, those stock cadians are not gue'sava, and that stock Sentinel is not a Crisis Suit. But those Cadians carrying Pulse Rifles, and that sentinel retrofitted with anti grav or jets, painted to match your sept, are better Tau than stock kits, IMO.

As for supporting the company, you should support products you use. In 40k, to me that means:
- If you play their rules, moded or not, actually buy a rulebook (second hand isn't a problem - they still got their first sale) and any books your forces use.
- If you want to use their models, buy their kit. If you don't, then don't buy it. Recasts, and just CAD'ing copies of their kit to print doesn't support the kits. But printing a custom model, or a third party's model, even for a GW concept, is fine - you're supporting the kit you want to use.