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.

It must be so much easier for you Az since you can draw on speaking for so many people were as other less able posters can only speak for themselves.

Kirby took GW public in 1994, when did the evil GW/Kirby thing start? Did Kirby go Darth Vader?

A disenfranchised player of Yugioh remaked that when people grow up they're wrong to assume what they like will grow with them. The card game has changed but is still the same.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Jah, you're "pulling a Talys" ie using your own very specific personal thoughts and opinions in order to try and argue against something that is widely accepted in a much broader sense.

Yes, you may not see the similarities but you need to be aware that it is an opinion that diverges from popular opinion to such a degree that many people are going to have a hard time believing it.

that is not a problem...
people are welcome to whatever opinion they choose to form of me, and my perspective...

here is the thing...
this is Dakka Discussions, not Dakka Debates...
i am not trying to argue against what is widely accepted, i am sharing my opinion...
i don't need to win the debate, i just need to share my perspective...

cheers
jah

 notprop wrote:
It must be so much easier for you Az since you can draw on speaking for so many people were as other less able posters can only speak for themselves.

No, I just use my eyes and read other people's posts, it's not fething rocket science.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jah-joshua wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Jah, you're "pulling a Talys" ie using your own very specific personal thoughts and opinions in order to try and argue against something that is widely accepted in a much broader sense.

Yes, you may not see the similarities but you need to be aware that it is an opinion that diverges from popular opinion to such a degree that many people are going to have a hard time believing it.

that is not a problem...
people are welcome to whatever opinion they choose to form of me, and my perspective...

here is the thing...
this is Dakka Discussions, not Dakka Debates...
i am not trying to argue against what is widely accepted, i am sharing my opinion...
i don't need to win the debate, i just need to share my perspective...

cheers
jah

I think in this context that's a distinction without a difference.

Tom Kirby was general manager at GW, left, was then asked back, lead a management buyout when Bryan Ansell wanted out and then floated the company some time later. All of that happened between circa 1988 and 1994.

@Az: that is your choice...
i think it is a distinction with a massive difference...
why does it bother you that i share my opinion, just because it differs from what is widely accepted???
is that against the rules of a discussion???

as long as i am not telling people that they are wrong, and that i am right, but am sticking to expressing how i see things, then my opinion should be just as valid as anybody else's...
you don't have to accept my view...

cheers
jah

 Azreal13 wrote:

 notprop wrote:
It must be so much easier for you Az since you can draw on speaking for so many people were as other less able posters can only speak for themselves.

No, I just use my eyes and read other people's posts, it's not fething rocket science.

No waving your hand and dismissing people wouldn't be considered any sort of science would it.

But hey, there's all the other people that agree with you right.

Go home notprop, you're drunk.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Go home notprop, you're drunk.

You'll get tennis elbow if you keep waving like that.

 jah-joshua wrote:
@Az: that is your choice...
i think it is a distinction with a massive difference...
why does it bother you that i share my opinion, just because it differs from what is widely accepted???
is that against the rules of a discussion???

as long as i am not telling people that they are wrong, and that i am right, but am sticking to expressing how i see things, then my opinion should be just as valid as anybody else's...
you don't have to accept my view...

cheers
jah

What makes you think it bothers me?

Honestly chap, you're starting to develop a persecution complex, I didn't mention it at the time, but yesterday I saw you get defensive and respond to a post that wasn't even referring to you.

But just a bunch of people stating their opinions isn't a discussion, it's just a bunch of people stating their opinions.

A discussion is one person giving their opinion and a bunch of others responding with "are you on meth?!!" Or something similar.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 notprop wrote:
You'll get tennis elbow if you keep waving like that.

You're going to have to start typing out the other half of whatever thoughts are in your head, if the rest of us are going to stand a chance.

If you're trying to imply I'm hand waving something away, it would really help to know what.

 jah-joshua wrote:

i've done one already, too, Talys...
now i am trying to improve on the first one for another client...

Spoiler:

i like this kit way more than i like the Sigmarites, personally, but that is because Sci-Fi floats my boat way more than Fantasy...

cheers
jah

This guy is fantastic, bud. You'll have to share your new, improved one

I want to do a new one as well, and I have a fresh (finecast :( ) Sanguinor and Astorath, too. I think the Sanguinary Guard kit is one of the niceest infantry-sized boxes that GW has ever released.

I don't think its a complex when you feel the need to jump on everything he posts. It's a thing not a perception at that point.

He likes some thing you don't. Give it a rest, it's hardly relevant to the topic.

Ah, so because I'm "jumping" on Jah (and in no way responding to his posts, often because they're a response to mine) you're jumping on me?

Got it.

yesterday i was having a rough day, and feeling quite ill...
headache, and Delhi Belly...
i'm much better today...

a discussion can be an exchange of ideas, but does not always have to reach a consensus...
here we do have a consensus where the majority says the new Eternals look like Space Marines...
i happen to be one of the few that disagree...
i don't need to win the debate, but i am still free to share my opinion...
if that leads you to not take me seriously, then so be it...
it doesn't mean i don't enjoy the discussion...

cheers
jah

I struggle to take your opinion that Sigmarines look unlike Space Marines seriously because it flies in the face of what, to me, is fairly conclusive evidence that they're very, very similar.

That doesn't mean I don't take you seriously, that's a totally different thing.

Neither myself, nor anyone I've ever seen on Dakka, has ever tried to argue that a poster isn't free to express their opinion, but, well, Brian Cox said it best in the quote in my sig...

 notprop wrote:
Tom Kirby was general manager at GW, left, was then asked back, lead a management buyout when Bryan Ansell wanted out and then floated the company some time later. All of that happened between circa 1988 and 1994.

My education in the matter was about 3-4 lines on Stuff of Legends. It crossed me wierd that Kirby is associated with the bad when he was there so long. When GW dropped the Baneblade plastic kit, in all its glory, it revealed that Forgeworld was dated and GW's plastics did it better, with more, at a better price. People still revere Forgeworld, but Forgeworld does not really offer any 'premium' product anymore than say Wyrd. That's just a casual observation, just saying, with no real implication to anyone.

Arguing about opinions is probably the stupidest thing possible. Jah doesn't think they look like space marines, along with some other people. Azreal does, along with some other people. Matter settled.

Personally, they do share similarities to marines insofar as they're big dudes in plate armour, but that's about it. They also share some aesthetics with Sanguinary Guard, which is because they're based on similar things, in this case historical armours. Why isn't there a big uproar because GW are making their minis look too much like greco-romans or spartans, rather than that they're looking too much like each other?

As for the whole Age Of Sigmar debate, it's happened, there are miniatures out there that you could purchase if they appeal to you. If they do then go ahead and paint them up, fine and dandy. If they don't, don't. That's also fine and dandy, you can play with your existing miniatures. And, for the record, they're also still completely usable in WHFB *insert preferred edition here*, and short of a Satanic Verses style mass book burning, they always will be.

I'm far from GW's biggest fan, nor am I their biggest critic, as is apparent, but I personally like the AOS stuff. It's different from Warhammer, but it's also different from WH40k. It also shares similarities to both. That's what happens when you have a sculpting team working on miniatures and rules and lore and all that other stuff.

Personally I'd love it if there was a huge plot twist here and the Sanguinary Guard actually based their armour on ancient descriptions of Sigmarite armour, and it turned out that Sanguinary Guard were the copycats, albeit retrospectively in our eyes.

I think we used all our uproar about GW ripping off historical tropes during the CHS case!

Fair point there I guess! I wouldn't necessarily say ripping off. Everything, from illustration, to photography. to literature, to sculpture, takes inspiration from somewhere. It's just a matter of how well it's blended into their existing style. In most cases GW, I'd say extremely well. One thing they're good at is making miniatures, regardless of what you believe their other faults are.

The key difference is only GW rips them off, then pretends they didn't and try to claim ownership...

 Azreal13 wrote:
The key difference is only GW rips them off, then pretends they didn't and try to claim ownership...

Nobody has to pretend or is. Not WotC, Paizo, Mantic, Privateer Press or any other. GW is one of the most creative engines out there.

They tried to claim halberd as their own trademark.

As well as Roman numerals and a bunch of other highly generic stuff.

Under questioning, Alan Merrett, head of GW IP, denied all outside influence and tried to claim that all GW stuff was created in the studio in a vacuum.

They tried to prosecute the author of a book that used the term "Space Marine" in the title, despite the use of that term predating GW's existence by decades.

JNC wrote:


GW is one of the most creative engines out there.

How's the Kool-aid?

Seriously though, do you have any reasonable argument to back that up?

Personally no i actually love theyre stuff, especially the 40K stuff.
Now im not a game player more a collector and modeller , when im in the mood. But there isnt much else that grabs my eye, and this could be down to the background and fluff or just the miniatures and the crisp casting of the parts to the models.
Then again a combination of these might be it? But i do enjoy making and painting 40k more than anything.
As far as the new figures go and after looking at them a few times on the GW website I quite like them. Partly due to the way they are on bases similar to 40k as i dont like the tray look with ten or more jammed together with warhammer, and partly as they do have a marine ish look about them but with a difference.
As far as the new starter boxed set is concerned i might get one as again its good value as these starter boxes normally are.
I dont post much but just thought id give my thoughts on this, and yes i do like them and i also hope GW carries on.
If GW did go tits up i would be stuck for what my hobby mainly consists of.

It seems to be getting a bit...testy in here.

RULE #1 everyone.

I...insist.

Thanks!

 Azreal13 wrote:
Ah, so because I'm "jumping" on Jah (and in no way responding to his posts, often because they're a response to mine) you're jumping on me?

Got it.

You actually are jumping on him, by taking offense to the fact that he doesn't look at the Sigmarites the same way you do. He has said in at least two posts he is speaking for himself, and that he doesn't see them as Space Marines. For saying it in as inoffensive fashion as possible you and Gump are either calling him a fool or dumping your opinion that the whole community thinks he's wrong.(incorrect by the way, since I agree with him)
A couple pages earlier in this thread, you were giving advice on how not to argue, yet are going against it by jumping all over someone because you can't accept the fact they are speaking for themselves on how they see a set of toy soldiers.

You seem to have a habit of reading posts wrong, dude.

I didn't take offence, I disagreed.

I don't claim the whole community thought anything, I said most people seemed to think one way.

Grump was being tongue in cheek, something at least Jah seemed to appreciate, even if it slipped past you.

I wasn't giving advice on "how not to argue" I was suggesting that if he wasn't wishing to engage in it, the only way to win was to not respond, because this is the Internet and some smart arse fether is always going to try and get in the last word.

But, other than that, good job!

If you say so, but you couldn't seem to let it rest.

 notprop wrote:
It must be so much easier for you Az since you can draw on speaking for so many people were as other less able posters can only speak for themselves.

There's a thing we like to call "reading".