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.

While our wallets already had to stomach the noticeable price hike (15-20%) from metal to finecast that happened about 2-3 years ago, it looks like the ride never ends. Now plastic is getting more expensive than finecast. I know, I know - these ridiculouse prices are only for the HQ clampacks, but still. When you compare them to similar HQ finecast models it's pretty obvious.

However, what makes me really get sick of GW is that instead of ADDING these new clampacks to their miniatures range, they make them REPLACEMENTS for already existing, cheaper finecast versions that are then pulled from production. This becomes most obvious with the new SM Terminator Librarian.



Ever since I saw this guy for the first time at a 2007 expo, I thought he was one of the most detailed and beautiful miniatures scuplted by GW. I know it's been 8 years, but still I never felt the model had the "old" look that might warrant a replacement for some of GW's old miniatures.

But now it's over, guys - the SM terminator librarian of old is gonna be sold out. The European and UK website has already listed him as sold out:



I'm talking about this fellow here:



He costs $22.25.

The new space marine Librarian, this guy:



is essentially the same librarian just looking the other direction and swapping the staff from his right to his left hand, and his stormbolter from his left to his right. That's it.

Okay, he comes with a cape.

Price? He costs $31.

That is a 40% increase in price.

The price hike from metal to finecast literally pales in comparison.

So yeah, grab the old guy while you can because the next generation of wargamers will grow up in a world where little Timmy has to save up a lot of money to get that HQ in a terminator suit compared to the power armored guys (the power armored libbie literally only costs $16). In short, there will be more 3+ save SM HQs and GW considers this a way of balancing the game.

This is cute. Dark Eldar had pretty much ALL fine cast characters and what didn't get replaced was straight up taken away from us. Yet, I haven't complained of gotten upset. We play a hobby and hobbies are typically expensive. I don't partake in the motorcycle hobby because I don't have the funds. Alas, it's life and how things have been for years.

I'll wait for homda to stop making parts for my motorcycle then, shall I? On wait, they don't do that. New models may come and go but vehicle manufacturers still support their products.

I can still buy parts for my Pontiac even though the entire brand is gone because GM, like most companies, knows that a happy customer continues to buy from them while an unhappy customer moves on. GW have yet to learn this lesson and so profits continue to slide.

No, agnosto, It is you and every customer who does not learn. You and everyone else is allowing GW to exploit your wallet when you continue to buy the models. Simply just stop buying if you dont like it. Do not be guilted into thinking that you must support GW or wh40k will die.

The new guy looks cool but he has the face of a man forcing out a big poo.

Its seems like if GW keeps selling their old casts people get upset because they don't update their line enough.

Then they make new models and they get crapped on for trying to update models. It's almost like the community is very large and they're not aiming/able to please every consumer.

Those molds are very expensive, and to boot I think the new Libby looks better/more detailed. The keys at his waist are no longer molded into the loin cloth, but are swinging off and away from his legs. The staff is no longer a blob like eagle topper, but has a more delicate look. I guess I just don't see the beef.

Like Dalymiddleboro said, it's an expensive hobby. It's always been one of the more costly TT games or sci-fi hobbies in general.

I don't see how the new Libby is more detailed than the previous one. I also don't understand the reasoning for up'ing the price from the previous one other than "because we can."

I'm curious what the price limit for these things would be for people. If the Libby was $50 would we still be saying "it's a expensive hobby bro, deal with it"? I'm assuming the answer is "no", but at the same time I'd like to know why this price increase was so necessary. I'm all for GW producing new models, but the rate at which prices are skyrocketing is alarming to say the least.

 Sir Arun wrote:
The price hike from metal to finecast literally pales in comparison.

Well, obviously. That price hike was because GW were being dicks; the cost increase for metal to resin was almost negligible. Resin to plastic? Huge increase in cost. They need to sell a lot to make back their investment, or sell fewer at a higher price. Whether you believe the current price is acceptable is another matter entirely, but it should be obvious why a plastic sprue with a limited market (let's face it, most people already have enough librarians) might cost more than a resin miniature.

The finecast version was my favorite Marine model to paint, the bust/head insertion area is way better than the new model, but in all honesty the lower body on the new model is superior.

Both are nice in their own way, but I won't be paying that much for a model that doesn't decisively demand it.

 -Shrike- wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
The price hike from metal to finecast literally pales in comparison.

Well, obviously. That price hike was because GW were being dicks; the cost increase for metal to resin was almost negligible. Resin to plastic? Huge increase in cost. They need to sell a lot to make back their investment, or sell fewer at a higher price. Whether you believe the current price is acceptable is another matter entirely, but it should be obvious why a plastic sprue with a limited market (let's face it, most people already have enough librarians) might cost more than a resin miniature.

Actually, this is pretty close to the truth, I think. I'm happy that there's another librarian that's not finecast for those people who need one, but until I feel like painting a fresh librarian, I'm not buying him at release, because I have way more librarians than I can possibly field already. I mean, I can field a maxed out Librarius twice over already and have guys to spare. On the other hand, chapters other than Blood Angels should have access to... a plastic librarian.

Since it's going to be a very low volume piece (my FLGS is only ordering in ONE lol), it's easy to understand why the price is high.

About the only way they could convince me to impulse buy more librarians at this point is if they had a box like the old Farseer and Warlocks -- except this one with a terminator armor libby with some non-terminator libbies

The price is unfortunate, but the model is quite cool looking and given it's a terminator and the power armor plastic clam pack guys are in the low $20s, it's reasonable to expect a premium imo.

But this would have been a much easier pill to swallow if it had come with multiple weapon options and perhaps a few molded shoulder pads to use.

One thing I'm often curious about is why none of the 40k models are as extravagent as the fantasy alternatives?

Take Nagash for example. He's a very ornate model. Now all the flowing ghosts and floating books may be a bit much for a Space Marine HQ, a far seer doing this calling down some eldritch lightning would be really cool.

 -Shrike- wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
The price hike from metal to finecast literally pales in comparison.

Well, obviously. That price hike was because GW were being dicks; the cost increase for metal to resin was almost negligible. Resin to plastic? Huge increase in cost. They need to sell a lot to make back their investment, or sell fewer at a higher price. Whether you believe the current price is acceptable is another matter entirely, but it should be obvious why a plastic sprue with a limited market (let's face it, most people already have enough librarians) might cost more than a resin miniature.

Well, obviously we can't have new players enter the game who don't happen to already possess a Librarian, I suppose that's what ebay's for.

The problem here is one of corporate growth. A retail company should foremost be concerned with growing their "brand" by getting more of their product in more peoples' hands. Price elasticity of demand is actually something that can be calculated mathematically, Price Elasticity of Demand = % Change in Quantity Demanded / % Change in Price. Once a product exceeds the price per unit elasticity threshold, the company will notice a drop in sales related to that product...if they're paying attention. Demand shrinks as prices rise and then drops off a veritable cliff when the elasticity threshold is passed.

I think that GW has determined that the demand for their products is inelastic, that demand is immune to price rises but I would argue that to be simply not the case. You may notice that they have occasionally charged lower prices on newer models; I think these to be test-cases and evidence of actual market research. Maybe someone was finding research not as "otiose" as their Board Chairman, Mr. Kirby? In any event, they charge more for their products now and less people are buying (as evidenced by their financial records) but they still raise prices. That's very odd from a retail company...at least one that wants to stay in business.

Well pretty much any price cut with a huge "X% off!" flyer plastered over any store (or a banner shown on a webstore, in this case) is as much a sales gimmick as a test for figuring out the current market demand.

If the price drop increases in revenue, it's clear the current price point is over the optimum for the product on the current demand curve. Any other situation would indicate they are charging at or below minimum. Given that they have done this, they must be getting the latter, like, a lot.

Yet still I'd agree GW is severely overestimating they market. As much as this is a niche market for luxurious goods (let's face it, you don't need a constant supply of plastic models of any kind to maintain you biological existence), their target audience aren't generally the kind for fancy yachts or grossly-overpriced semi-racing cars. An with the market getting more competitive, they are facing an ever more elastic demand with switching made easier with more alternatives.

It's fine switching their production line to a more cost effective one, and I know it costs money, like a lot for massive-produced plastic sprues. But those initial investments are fixed costs that should not be taken into consideration when deciding the long-term price of their product. I'd expect if the price hike is caused by the initial investment, over say, 1 or two years the plastic lines should have an equal, if no more severe price drop. As the marginal cost per product should be really low for mass-produced plastic sprues. Somehow, I don't think that's gonna happen.

In essence people jokingly call it plasti-crack and GW prices according to that addictive property of its products. Now if only they'd give that first free sample that gets everyone hooked.

It's very clear they've taken it beyond what's mathematically optimal. Their revenue drops and grows more dependent on smaller sales volume.

 lcmiracle wrote:
Well pretty much any price cut with a huge "X% off!" flyer plastered over any store (or a banner shown on a webstore, in this case) is as much a sales gimmick as a test for figuring out the current market demand.

If the price drop increases in revenue, it's clear the current price point is over the optimum for the product on the current demand curve. Any other situation would indicate they are charging at or below minimum. Given that they have done this, they must be getting the latter, like, a lot.

Yet still I'd agree GW is severely underestimating their market overestimating they market's demands. As much as this is a niche market for luxurious goods (let's face it, you don't need a constant supply of plastic models of any kind to maintain you biological existence), their target audience aren't generally the kind for fancy yachts or grossly-overpriced semi-racing cars. An with the market getting more competitive, they are facing an ever more elastic demand with switching made easier with more alternatives.

It's find switching their production line to a more cost effective one, and I know it costs money, like a lot for massive-produced plastic sprues, but those initial investments are fixed costs that should not be taken into consideration when deciding the long-term price of their product.

Yes, sales are often used to collect data on demand and to test current pricing schemes. GW no longer engages in this type of activity as they have determined it would cheapen their brand.

Interestingly, luxury goods are more elastic than necessities meaning that demand is more affected by price fluctuations.

GW has possibly determined, like several posters apparently, that the only people who will purchase their products are those who already possess several and have priced new products accordingly. No reason to sell a model for $10 if only 1000 people will buy it after their current models are replaced.

 agnosto wrote:

Yes, sales are often used to collect data on demand and to test current pricing schemes. GW no longer engages in this type of activity as they have determined it would cheapen their brand.

Interestingly, luxury goods are more elastic than necessities meaning that demand is more affected by price fluctuations.

GW has possibly determined, like several posters apparently, that the only people who will purchase their products are those who already possess several and have priced new products accordingly. No reason to sell a model for $10 if only 1000 people will buy it after their current models are replaced.

You know what's dumb? If they drop their price to slightly below most similar products, they can easily force most of their competitors out of the market. I'd say they have the ability to do so -- they have so many large scale plastic lines that, in the long-run, costs no where near the current market price. Should they just drop the price slightly below their competitiors (not that I really care, I don't buy large quantities of models off GW stores, I got most of mine off second hand markets or several years-old starter sets), virtually all of them will suffer a huge drop in their profit (as far as I can tell, even PP models are mostly at a far smaller scale, given the materials used), thus having a far more difficult time surviving. I mean seriously, what really made them believe that their new lines will have such a short lifespan that they must make their money back within a year or so to justify such a drastic price increment?

 aka_mythos wrote:
It's very clear they've taken it beyond what's mathematically optimal. Their revenue drops and grows more dependent on smaller sales volume.

This is not actually factual.

For all we know, due to players simply wanting to play a different game, or being interested in smaller unit count games, or just GW or Fantasy or 40k fatigue, even if prices were at 2005 levels, there may be a loss of players to other games and lower profits. It is actually possible that GW HAS optimized its profit curve and that it's best medium term strategy for profit maximization is to charge as much as its best customers will pay at the expense of its smallest customers. It's entirely possible that a segment of the wargaming community has a different and unreconcilable philosophy than GW, one that GW is unwilling to cater to, independent of price. In other words, "this is the game we want to make" versus "this is the game you want to play".

Or, conventional wisdom could be correct, and GW could be bleeding customers primarily due to price, and were GW prices 40% less, it would have 80% more revenue.

I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between, bit we'll never know.

 lcmiracle wrote:

You know what's dumb? If they drop their price to slightly below most similar products, they can easily force most of their competitors out of the market. I'd say they have the ability to do so -- they have so many large scale plastic lines that, in the long-run, costs no where near the current market price. Should they just drop the price slightly below their competitiors (not that I really care, I don't buy large quantities of models off GW stores, I got most of mine off second hand markets or several years-old starter sets), virtually all of them will suffer a huge drop in their profit (as far as I can tell, even PP models are mostly at a far smaller scale, given the materials used), thus having a far more difficult time surviving. I mean seriously, what really made them believe that their new lines will have such a short lifespan that they must make their money back within a year or so to justify such a drastic price increment?

Their current business model completely focuses on short-term profit at the expense of long-term sustainability, it's been this way since the LOTR bubble burst (if not before). From what I've been able to ascertain, the current mindset is that if a product hasn't made a profit within a few months of release, it never will and needs to go away or otherwise marginalized. An example of this is Dreadfleet; GW went through all the trouble to make it and then dropped it like a bad habit after a few months of sitting on the shelves. The thing that kills me about Dreadfleet though is that instead of running a short-run sale to determine if the issue was price, they just recalled and tossed it all (by all accounts).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talys wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
It's very clear they've taken it beyond what's mathematically optimal. Their revenue drops and grows more dependent on smaller sales volume.

This is not actually factual.

For all we know, due to players simply wanting to play a different game, or being interested in smaller unit count games, or just GW or Fantasy or 40k fatigue, even if prices were at 2005 levels, there may be a loss of players to other games and lower profits. It is actually possible that GW HAS optimized its profit curve and that it's best medium term strategy for profit maximization is to charge as much as its best customers will pay at the expense of its smallest customers. It's entirely possible that a segment of the wargaming community has a different and unreconcilable philosophy than GW, one that GW is unwilling to cater to, independent of price. In other words, "this is the game we want to make" versus "this is the game you want to play".

Or, conventional wisdom could be correct, and GW could be bleeding customers primarily due to price, and were GW prices 40% less, it would have 80% more revenue.

I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between, bit we'll never know.

The problem is that they have shown that they don't know and we'll never know without some expensive market research. They are bleeding customers as witnessed by large reductions in sales volume but without them actually performing a market analysis, they can't know the reason. Their Chairman has stated that market research is "otiose" but that could be hyperbole. If I want to credit GW management at all with any sort of intelligence and assume that they've actually performed some research, what's left is the assumption that they know that they are losing customers, are impotent to stop it or attract new custom and have determined that the best solution is a controlled descent into obscurity. The release schedule counters the scenario that I just played out which leaves me with the assumption that they're all a bunch of twits and sitting 'round the roaring campfire with fiddles while the company burns down around them.

I dont usually have a moan about GW prices but the new Libby was a bit of a wtf for me. He is after all, like, just a Libby 0_o

Finecrap. Failcast, errr... Finecast was such an inferior material that I am glad GW got rid of it.

If you remember, prices all went up when GW converted from white metal to Failcast. Now they are going up again as they switch to plastic.

The one constant here is that GW always raises prices, and it would seem to have little to do with the type of material they use.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
This is cute. Dark Eldar had pretty much ALL fine cast characters and what didn't get replaced was straight up taken away from us. Yet, I haven't complained of gotten upset. We play a hobby and hobbies are typically expensive.

yeah that DE release was rough. 1 new model, the VR and pretty much nerfed everything but scourges and took away all the characters and options.

No one complains because who cares about Xenos.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tamwulf wrote:
Finecrap. Failcast, errr... Finecast was such an inferior material that I am glad GW got rid of it.
If you remember, prices all went up when GW converted from white metal to Failcast. Now they are going up again as they switch to plastic.
The one constant here is that GW always raises prices, and it would seem to have little to do with the type of material they use.

Yeah, remember when you could get a really cool HQ model for $10, and he was made of metal and never broke. Well now you can spend $35 and get one made of plastic.

It went from €21 to €24 on the Dutch website. They change the price or is the price hike not so significant here?

 Exergy wrote:

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
This is cute. Dark Eldar had pretty much ALL fine cast characters and what didn't get replaced was straight up taken away from us. Yet, I haven't complained of gotten upset. We play a hobby and hobbies are typically expensive.

yeah that DE release was rough. 1 new model, the VR and pretty much nerfed everything but scourges and took away all the characters and options.

No one complains because who cares about Xenos.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tamwulf wrote:
Finecrap. Failcast, errr... Finecast was such an inferior material that I am glad GW got rid of it.
If you remember, prices all went up when GW converted from white metal to Failcast. Now they are going up again as they switch to plastic.
The one constant here is that GW always raises prices, and it would seem to have little to do with the type of material they use.

Yeah, remember when you could get a really cool HQ model for $10, and he was made of metal and never broke. Well now you can spend $35 and get one made of plastic.

I think the books very good. I've won a few tourneys with it. I'm just sour about vect not bring in it. That's like them taking marneus away from SM players.

I spent $1250 on a shotgun, I spent $130 on a tent, $60 on a sleeping bag, $2500 in lumber and a metal door, $240 in ammo in my box not counting what I've shot off already, $500+ for a gas generator, $180 chainsaw, $400+ for various propane gadgets, $200+ in consumables each time I go out, $150+ in gas each time I go out, $80/day to rent a 24' boat off someone I know.
I've recently did a significant drop in playing video games during off season and bad weather, this new hobby is my rainy day and winter month hobby. I used to joke that it's not possible for my outdoorsmen hobby to ever reach the amount I've spent in video games since I first began that hobby in the early 80's with an Atari. But I'm no longer interested in keeping up to date with the hardware and play testing unreleased games anymore. Nothing to do with not wanting to pay, I can pay as I'm a shameless wallet warrior. Just time for a change, my hand eye coordination isn't what it was before. Overtime as I continue to go on hunting trips it might surpass what I've paid in video games.
I can make an apocalypse Ork army and full GW battleboard and terrain and it won't reach close to what I've paid for in hobbies, indeed what a majority of people pay for in various different hobbies. Nonetheless it is a hobby itself and yes it is expensive, while not a complete universal truth it's still a very common trait amongst hobbies to be money sinks with no payoff except the enjoyment of the owner and a confused wife. I used to be little Timmy who had to decide not to get into this hobby because I couldn't afford it. I couldn't afford the above either until I was pretty much done college. Console hardware was gifts when I was younger and I rented games. I couldn't begun this yrs ago but I decided to get my hunting and camping essentials first.
I do understand a good measure of the frustration. They make the best looking models in the market, however, naturally they will be more expensive then any others. I can agree that they can put more thought into their marketing strategy but I'll not ever dismiss the notion that their artists and moulding factories churn out incredible products. They have every right to take advantage of this but it's preferable that it be done without leaving everyone with a nasty taste in their mouth. Reminds me of the stretch when TSR was hijacked by lawyers before WoC grabbed it. But yes even if they regain a comprehensive strategy I'd still expect them to be more expensive then the competition's lower quality products. Also just to add a note, I've seen this argument a few times in threads but I don't think it makes sense that the price of the models should reflect the pt cost in the codexes made up by the fools writing the books. The artist's efforts and the operation costs of the production is the factor. I'd be more disappointed if they chose to cut back on the quality to reduce prices. Glad so far they use great artists and moulds.

 Tamwulf wrote:
The one constant here is that GW always raises prices, and it would seem to have little to do with the type of material they use.

Agreed, ANY change they do involves some cost so rather than absorb the cost within a year or so, they pass on the cost to you their faithful customer!
There are dividends to pay so any capital assets need to pay for themselves within a fiscal year.

In all seriousness, plastic dies are the single greatest expense they have so return on investment is critical.
I wonder how they determine the volume for the initial run?
Setup costs tend to be high and a flat fee while the cost of the individual parts are relatively trivial.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ProwlerPC wrote:
I spent $1250 on a shotgun, I spent $130 on a tent, $60 on a sleeping bag, $2500 in lumber and a metal door, $240 in ammo in my box not counting what I've shot off already, $500+ for a gas generator, $180 chainsaw, $400+ for various propane gadgets, $200+ in consumables each time I go out, $150+ in gas each time I go out, $80/day to rent a 24' boat off someone I know.<snip>

Gadzooks! How did the pioneers survive??
My brother had made it his mission to learn "ancient technology" which is a fancy way of saying native craft.
You may want to look into it... he has made himself everything from his boat to his bow to the knives and arrows in between.
This IS your choice but I guess I am saying that he would find little value in your expenses for a similar experience.
You have decided however to what degree you wish to experience the outdoors.

Also just to add a note, I've seen this argument a few times in threads but I don't think it makes sense that the price of the models should reflect the pt cost in the codexes made up by the fools writing the books. The artist's efforts and the operation costs of the production is the factor. I'd be more disappointed if they chose to cut back on the quality to reduce prices. Glad so far they use great artists and moulds.

I think it makes good business sense too:
They spend a lot on molds, you want them to last as long as possible and the figures to have utility for years to come.
If I were them, I would split it to two sprues: the basic figure sculpt and the add-on bits with an eye for mixing an matching so an "update" would not retire a mold.
We are already seeing that as a chapter specific clamshell upgrade or rolled into a box where it really is just the clamshell and basic marine kit.

I'll gladly pay more money for models that aren't made out of one of the most brittle substances known to man.

@agnosto - personally, I don't think it is just an issue of price per midel. The CW is that WMH is growing (though I personally have observed that in the last couple of years, the crowd has shrunk, in favor of board games), and their price per model is similar or higher. The price per army is much lower, though, and I think this is what Sigmar is partly looking to address.

Still, I don't really know if it matters. I'm pretty sure there are people who want to move on from the 40k/WHFB universe just as after a decade or two some people will want to move on from the WMH universe.

The other thing is that GW is determined to make progressively more complex models with more parts and pieces than ever before. I love it, bit people who just want a game piece don't. Like someone above that compared this to metal models of yesteryear. Well, from a modeling perspective the new librarians are just superior in every way, especially undercuts. As much as I am nostalgic for old lead and pewter minis, every time I paint a PP or Infinty model that's metal, the technical shortcomings are just painfully obvious.

Finally, GW doesn't really pay attention or care that people in 2015 generally have less time and buying power for luxury goods as compared to 1985. The median salary hasn't even kept up with inflation.

In the end analysis, who knows, maybe what GW is doing really is what's best for GW. I doubt they will shrink into obscurity; at some point, they will reach an equilibrium where most of the people who are left are relatively price insensitive (to the extent that no matter how you cut it, $50 or $100 is just not a lot of money to them) AND they like GW's game, game size, and game style. In my area, these people happen to also be the customers that buy the most stuff from hobby stores, and not just GW product, but hobby supplies, too. I frequently see people cart out a thousand bucks of GW models and books, and have rarely seen that with another game system.

@ Talys,

I agree that it's not price per model; more likely it's total cost or at least perceived start-up costs of getting into GW's games. If I walk in the door, interested in trying 40k because I've seen other people play it and it looks fun and someone were to tell me that I had to spend $120 or more just on books, I'd tell them to GTFO. I don't know, maybe GW has realized some of the error of their ways in that the current rumors of fantasy include a smaller version of the game with a lower model count which would me a smaller entry price for new players.

Until recent years, GW has benefitted from being nearly the only option for non-historical wargames. Since the growth of PP (wm/h) and FFG (XWing), they're sales volume is dropping like a rock. Customers are voting displeasure about something with their wallets and GW seems to be unwilling to listen, or is listening to themselves too much. I don't believe that they are completely deaf, I just feel that they may be taking things in a direction that may not have the end result that they desire.

In example, other game systems offer tighter rules-writing and support competitive play and are both growing exponentially in player-base while GW has seen revenue fall at double-digits. I agree that other people might be walking away to other games, but GW needs to ask, "why?" and more specifically what they can do to stop them from leaving or bring back the people that left. Without doing this, they'll continue to shrink and I'm very much afraid that they'll reach a point beyond which they'll be required to make some hard choices or they'll go away like many stronger companies have before them.

Isn't this just doing what they said in the first place with finecraft, a stop gap. So this would be a case of GW doing not only what they said but letting us know from the start.

While I mostly agree - The new miniature is nice but doesn't quite stand up to the original - I think it's unfair to say "It's the same dude with reversed weapons and a cape". See, even if CAD is involved miniatures are not videogame assets you can repose on the fly. It tries to mirror the looks of the old one as close as possible, granted, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been built from the ground up.