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.

 plastictrees wrote:
Those look like little shuriken embedded in the masonry under the Jester! That's a neat detail.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:

Warhams-77 wrote:
I really hope it can transport more than 6

I'm gonna bet it's 6. I mean, it's basically a Venom. And people saying 12, I sincerely doubt it when it's like half the size of a raider which carries 10.

Thinking about it, I'm not sure I'd want to use 10 anyway. This is going to be a pretty elite/small army, I imagine that the Starweaver is going to be more points than a Venom, and full of guys that are significantly more expensive than Kabalites or Wyches. I'd rather have more Starweavers full of fewer guys.

Pretty much this. Would be happy with carrying capacity of 6, for once matching with the box size. Thinking this thing holds more than 6 is wishful thinking though. Venoms only hold 5, and the increase in size from Starweaver -> Venom is really just enough to not make you roll you're eyes at a capacity of 6. Seriously, do any of us believe 5 warriors can really hold on to a Venom swooping around at high speeds w/out one of them flying off?

These filthy bastards from GW.. You monsters, I was planning to buy a WiiU, and you are just releasing a coolest looking and perfectly appealing full Army with proper codex and lots of rich and great packs and clams - even more, of Harlies which I've always found neat, even old FC models? Why? Why you hurt me and my wallet this way? :(


Anyway, already ordered two Troupes and one Solitaire, and later I'll take some Jetbikes and two Starweavers perhaps. And Jester(s). Oh Gods, it looks so damn great.

Nice that Death Jester, but will it also be 28$?

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Nice that Death Jester, but will it also be 28$?

Well, going by the tall base, I'm saying something closer to $32.

And as Az pointed out, the Starweaver is definitely bigger than the Venom, you are correct good sir. No the question will be if is it more expensive than a raider.

 Accolade wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Nice that Death Jester, but will it also be 28$?

Well, going by the tall base, I'm saying something closer to $32.

Or you could just read the price on the Solitaire.

Try $26.

I don't see why they have to be the same price? I seriously doubt they'll be the same, do you see the size of the scenic base!?

Now, looking at the Necron commander, I do see he is $28, so I think Jehan is probably right.

EDIT: Also, the new Harlequin Solitaire is $3 over the release of the DE Archon from just a few months ago. I think expecting the Deathjester at $28 is not outside of the scope. I realize I was being exaggerative, but then I see that the old Deathjester, in all its Finecrap glory, was $20. So I'm just curious about why it went up in price by (at least) 30%.

But I suppose we can't make fun of GW's fan-driven price strategy.

The star weaver is definitely more than a raider price wise - at least here in Australia... from what I hear, they will be more expensive than a troupe box...

 Accolade wrote:
I don't see why they have to be the same price? I seriously doubt they'll be the same, do you see the size of the scenic base!?

Have you seen the size of the scenic base on the Solitaire?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
I don't see why they have to be the same price? I seriously doubt they'll be the same, do you see the size of the scenic base!?

Have you seen the size of the scenic base on the Solitaire?

Copying stuff down since we're dancing around at the moment...

EDIT: Also, the new Harlequin Solitaire is $3 over the release of the DE Archon from just a few months ago. I think expecting the Deathjester at $28 is not outside of the scope. I realize I was being exaggerative, but then I see that the old Deathjester, in all its Finecrap glory, was $20. So I'm just curious about why it went up in price by (at least) 30%.

But I suppose we can't make fun of GW's fan-driven price strategy.

The Deathjester's base is bigger and his gun is bigger. As far as GW's logic is concerned, he will cost more than the Solitaire.

Is there another photo I'm missing, because you can't tell diddly from that on the Deathjester/Shadowseer.

Yeah it's wider to accommodate the pose--but it looks like it's the same size as my Illic Nightspear, who is $19.25 in Finecast.

This is the age of plastic now, and just like the age of Finecast that followed metal, prices only went up. I mean, look at this guys:



Dude is still $15 from back when he was originally released (I believe). That's the old metal sculpt that got converted to Finecast, so I'm not entirely sure if the price went up, but I KNOW it didn't go down...

Hero characters used to be that cheap not all that long ago. The new Necron overlord is an extra $6 compared to all of the other Finecast characters, even ones that are way bigger. The DE Archon is the same way. And the Harlies are just another step on that path.

That model isn't converted to Finecast.

This set contains 1 metal Farseer with Staff.

Also, saying that the new Necron Overlord isn't that large or bulky is just silly. He's on a 40mm base and he fills it pretty well.

Oh dang, then he didn't undergo the Finecast transition, I guess that's why his price never went up. The crazy thing is GW marketed Finecast as a cost-saver for sculpts, yet magically all of the prices went up. Plastics I would hazard a guess aren't more expensive, but somehow we're getting these 30% markups on characters (even if it is more expensive the quality is lesser than good resin, so the reason for a price mark-up is still questionable).

And the new Overlord can't be bigger than Illuminor Szeras, or Imotekh the Stormlord, or the Necron destroyer. He's not any more detailed, or any bigger, he's just more expensive.

Really looking forward to seeing transport rules. Great news on dex pre order though I really wondered if this would be stand alone. Just does not seem like there will be to many diverse builds without allies.

I've heard we might get cwe and de units, mainly vehicles, but we will just have to wait and see.

Well in Oz the Death Jester/Shadowseer are already $28... and the new Solitaire is $28.50. Make of that what you will.

 Accolade wrote:
Oh dang, then he didn't undergo the Finecast transition, I guess that's why his price never went up. The crazy thing is GW marketed Finecast as a cost-saver for sculpts, yet magically all of the prices went up. Plastics I would hazard a guess aren't more expensive, but somehow we're getting these 30% markups on characters (even if it is more expensive the quality is lesser than good resin, so the reason for a price mark-up is still questionable).

Plastics necessitate an entirely different casting process, as has been mentioned time and time and time again.

And the new Overlord can't be bigger than Illuminor Szeras, or Imotekh the Stormlord, or the Necron destroyer. He's not any more detailed, or any bigger, he's just more expensive.

So again: You haven't seen him in person?

He's not as big as a Necron Destroyer certainly, but he's about on par with Imotekh or Szeras.

 Accolade wrote:

The crazy thing is GW marketed Finecast as a cost-saver for sculpts,

Silly rabbit.

GW never marketed anything, as anything.


Ever.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Plastics necessitate an entirely different casting process, as has been mentioned time and time and time again.

GW prices are arbitrary, regardless of the casting process.

Dang, 57 USD here to get a box of Harlequins. Same for the 2 jet bikes.

I liked them too. They would look awesome painted up as a force.

Well generally the vehicles are the least of a rip off... so I have no qualms buying those, it's the rest they get me, but there's 2 editions back of everything I can pick from (so far most of my army is finecast, not that I paid finecast prices) and the rest will be finecast or metal... I might get a box of plastics, so I have some from every edition...
That'd be nice.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
Oh dang, then he didn't undergo the Finecast transition, I guess that's why his price never went up. The crazy thing is GW marketed Finecast as a cost-saver for sculpts, yet magically all of the prices went up. Plastics I would hazard a guess aren't more expensive, but somehow we're getting these 30% markups on characters (even if it is more expensive the quality is lesser than good resin, so the reason for a price mark-up is still questionable).

Plastics necessitate an entirely different casting process, as has been mentioned time and time and time again.

Can you not have a conversation with another person without constantly attacking them? Seriously dude, what's wrong with you, is Tom Kirby your great uncle and you feel the need to be insulting to people who dare accuse GW of missteps?

GW's plastics do not cost what they did in 2005, if they did they wouldn't be having these short runs and then ditching the models from sales. GW prices things however the they want- go look at their crapy eBook variety versions and tell me why those electrons cost sooo much to purchase (the Necron eBook cost as much as the old softback books!)

There is absolutely no reason why miniatures that cost what they did in metal cost close to twice that in plastic. And if they really do cost that much more, then why isn't GW making them in metal? They sure don't have interest in conversions anymore so it can't be because of that.

 Accolade wrote:
Oh dang, then he didn't undergo the Finecast transition, I guess that's why his price never went up. The crazy thing is GW marketed Finecast as a cost-saver for sculpts, yet magically all of the prices went up.

GW never marketed 'Fine'cast as a cost-saver. They marketed it as a higer-quality material. It was everyone else that said it was a cost-saver.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Accolade wrote:
Can you not have a conversation with another person without constantly attacking them?

There was no attack in the post you just quoted.

Agreed, I didn't read any attack from Kan, he's just a compulsive corrector.

 insaniak wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
Can you not have a conversation with another person without constantly attacking them?

There was no attack in the post you just quoted.

I still think it's a case of being talked down to over the last couple of posts, which I don't understand the necessity of in the context of talking about plastic miniatures.

 Accolade wrote:
Oh dang, then he didn't undergo the Finecast transition, I guess that's why his price never went up. The crazy thing is GW marketed Finecast as a cost-saver for sculpts, yet magically all of the prices went up.

GW never marketed 'Fine'cast as a cost-saver. They marketed it as a higer-quality material. It was everyone else that said it was a cost-saver.

You are correct and I appear to be mistaken about the Finecast thing. Reading the 2011 report, Mark Wells seems to comment than the move to Finecast was in response to the volatile metal market. However, I think GW made a poor choice going away from metal- judging by how PP prices their metals, it doesn't seem like they would be as expensive as Finecast is now.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Agreed, I didn't read any attack from Kan, he's just a compulsive corrector.

And a tireless defender.

 Accolade wrote:


You are correct and I appear to be mistaken about the Finecast thing. Reading the 2011 report, Mark Wells seems to comment than the move to Finecast was in response to the volatile metal market. However, I think GW made a poor choice going away from metal- judging by how PP prices their metals, it doesn't seem like they would be as expensive as Finecast is now.

GW wanted to move away from metal to reduce their costs, thereby increasing their profits.

At least, that was the plan.

I wish we could find those initial fluff pieces about FineCost on the GW website. They were tremendously funny for all the wrong reasons.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Agreed, I didn't read any attack from Kan, he's just a compulsive corrector.

And a tireless defender.

I'm really sensing the start of a thing here, like Kan's own folk song.

But the topic, she go off.

 pretre wrote:
Just pull him off the rock and put him on a normal base.

Are you crazy! Plastic is way to finicky for type of procedure!

Edit: Sorry for the also OT joke should have hit the next page first then I would have seen the train wreck of the last 10 posts.

New starweaver looks much bigger then a venom, hopefully it trollies 10 guys.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I wish we could find those initial fluff pieces about FineCost on the GW website. They were tremendously funny for all the wrong reasons.

I still have the WD here. It's amazing. A whole WD (Old monthly WDs) dedicated to just FC. Showing off countless models in the new material and saying page after page how it will be lightweight and retain 'perfect, crisp detail', and how amazing it is at holding paint!