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.

To be fair, the dwarfs were somewhat lacking in the beasts department even for whfb. I always expected them to have some sort of golem or underground beasties to kill things with, as well as having weird and wonderful contraptions. I quite welcome these salamander beasties.

These look horribly cheap. No idea who chose to forgo the illusion of hair and just modelled rubber 10cm wide straps on their heads just to keep it simpler to cast. And what is going on with those typical simple to cast cutt offs at the dragon heads and low detail flames of their weapons.
Why are these horrors 4x as expensive as their competitors :\


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cygnnus wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
I think even with the increased prices it still works out a lot cheaper than WHFB. Our regular Dark Elf player used to run a horde of Witch Elves even in 1250pt games - which was £140 in a single regiment, plus all the other stuff in his army.

AoS armies are much smaller than WHFB armies from experience which still makes the game on the whole cheaper than 8th. Plus no need to buy books if you don't want to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zywus wrote:
Are these guys monopose?


And what's happened to their beards?!

O
I want to know if these shields can be modeled in a front facing pose, they look dumb with them waving about in the air lol.

Ugh, wow... Now let's imagine for a minute what the comments would be if Mantic released those models... The detail on the right arms and legs is just wrong. Looks like everything that can go wrong with trying to render organic shapes in HIPS. Maybe it's the paint jobs, but regardless, the poses are rediculous. Little jewel-like wonders, these most certainly are not!

Valete,

JohnS

these even look worse :(

I think that's an apt description...they look like Gw contracted Mantic to make their official slayers.

I think the flame lizards look neat and I think the slayers look good as long as they're holding two-handed weapons. The guys with an axe and shield have really awful poses.

The slayers don't look too bad, but the hearth guard are a bit meh.I hope those giant lumps of rock aren't a part of the model (though it feels a lot like they are!)

Why scale creep?

It’s easier (and cheaper) to sculpt and paint the detail on a larger model.
They will look more impressive on the tabletop, which is a good point when you are building a small army.
It helps justify the high price.
It makes the old WHFB figures semi-incompatible.
Material cost increase is trivial in plastic.


Why monopose?

It’s easier and cheaper to sculpt and mould a figure with fewer parts.
They are easier to assemble, which is a good point when you are building a large army.

The downside: If you are building a small skirmish game force, you want more variety in the individual figures.


GW's strategy is to drive down costs and drive up prices, and they have done very well. Over the past five years they have got their Cost of Goods down from average 25% to average 20%. This has given a massive boost to profitability. This strategy has to be enhanced for AoS because GW expect to sell fewer books and kits per customer compared to WHFB.

Whether this affects the customer's quality experience is a matter for everyone to consider and make their own purchase decisions.

I love them, when I saw these leaked pictures I karate kicked off whatever bs conversion project that was on my workshop desk, needed room for the 30 or so new slayers i'm getting! Can't wait to get my hands on the sprues, looks like lots of good dragon and fire iconography bits to spice up some of my older dwarfs.

I hate them. As long as they took to come out with plastic Slayers, and this is the end result? I don't believe they could have been screwed up any worse.
I am on the Nope train to Nopeville.

A few clarifications:

Scale creep - the models look to be the same size as the 8th edition WHFB models (see my comparison in size of Grimm Burloksson vs 7th edition models), the 8th edition dwarfs look fine - these will also look fine along your existing collection.

Monopose - look at the wide frame shots, there are shields in much better poses (to the front/side of the dwarfs, not up in the air).

Yeah, those black haired dwarfs have terrible poses and goofy paint jobs. We've got tons of other leaked images with good poses and awesome paint jobs too though.

 Bottle wrote:
A few clarifications:

Scale creep - the models look to be the same size as the 8th edition WHFB models (see my comparison in size of Grimm Burloksson vs 7th edition models), the 8th edition dwarfs look fine - these will also look fine along your existing collection.

Monopose - look at the wide frame shots, there are shields in much better poses (to the front/side of the dwarfs, not up in the air).

Yeah, those black haired dwarfs have terrible poses and goofy paint jobs. We've got tons of other leaked images with good poses and awesome paint jobs too though.

I think your confused on what they mean by scale creep, not on an individual model basis, but the average size of the models they are releasing.

EX: Archaeon from 8th to AoS
Negash from 4th to End of the OldWorld.
Or a more bland example. Empire Lord on a Griffon 5th , to the one that game out in 8th

They have been making bigger and bigger models just like the poster a few back said, and for all his reason. They make more money and G fanatics will buy it no matter what. So they make more money.

I for one have jumped train for these very scale reasons. If i was trying to get into this game like i did in high school, I just couldn't it's priced out of my range. (Hell almost out of my range today) Back in high school I build my unit of 20 Woodelf Spearmen piece by piece by buying 2 model blisters when I could afford them. I put what models I had on a cardboard movement tray that was the size of 20, and play a freaking amazing game with a great ruleset. Now they put out a ruleset that I could have done a better job (And did a few years before with my legowars game) and started releasing models like 3 chaos knights for $100. Are you kidding me, how is someone suppose to get into this hobby now a days.

No, that's not what anyone means by "scale creep", they are saying that a dwarf of AoS is bigger than a dwarf of WHFB.

the_Armyman wrote:

 Lt. Donomar StubbornBull wrote:

...truly atrocious looking models... the sculpting...is so bad looking... the poses are a throwback to the bad parts of very retro plastic models... the paint job is just bizarre.

...but I think I'll pick up a box or two...

You are truly the customer that GW deserves, not the customer GW needs

The dorfs are nice, if a bit big. The Salamander was predictable, in that GW loves making big, expensive plastic kits these days. IMO, the two kits they put out the last time the Dwarfs got an update--Ironbreakers/Irondrakes and Hammerers/Longbeards--are actually better.

Leave out the personals and selective quoting please

The first part of my post was relating specifically to the shield guys which have been well documented as looking pretty sub-par. The second part of what I wrote was relating to the rest of the army so yes, despite taking issue with some things, I think I will pick up a few boxes of the other slayer models.

saxx wrote:I love them, when I saw these leaked pictures I karate kicked off whatever bs conversion project that was on my workshop desk, needed room for the 30 or so new slayers i'm getting! Can't wait to get my hands on the sprues, looks like lots of good dragon and fire iconography bits to spice up some of my older dwarfs.

Yeah I think they will be great from a conversion point of view. I'd be more thinking of mixing and matching with some of the current dwarf weaponry to tone them down a bit but good potential for conversions now

The monopose I can live with it is the obvious choice to cheap out on sprue and design cost that bother me. Its a step back in time and quality. They used to do all kinds of smart tricks to try to hide and minimalise it, but not on these models.


Lets back this up with examples behind a spoiler for those who don't see it.




I

Now they just gave up and went the ugly simple way. This bothers me since they do price them as premium products.

are we sure that the crest is supposed to be hair ?

While the hair on the character sprue does look a bit better than on the infantry, the problem with the hair and flames isn't the plastic's fault, it's the design's fault. Ever since GW switched to 3D rendering in place of traditional sculpting their models have been off-puttingly blocky. One need only look to the plastic Dwarf Warriors to see that hair can be much more detailed than what we're getting now.

 streetsamurai wrote:
are we sure that the crest is supposed to be hair ?

It is supposed to be hair. I thought it would be much cooler and more fluffy as a fire burning in the top of the helmet. The FyreSlayers carrying the sacred flames of Grimnir into the heart of battle. They could have a head butt attack that gives a Mortal Wound.

 judgedoug wrote:
WHITE DWARF WEEKLY 103 (ENGLISH) 4
FYRESLAYERS AURIC RUNEMASTER plastic clamshell 30
FYRESLAYERS VULKITE BERZERKERS plastic box  60
FYRESLAYERS HEARTHGUARD plastic box 40
THE BEAST ARISES: PREDATOR/PREY (HB) 2ND BOOK IN SERIES HARD BACK 40K NOVEL 17.5
RGW: THE BRIDGE OF SEVEN SORROWS AUDIOBK 4TH IN SERIES AoS Audio Book 17.5

Dollar prices? How many models are in the Fyre Slayer boxes?

10 in the 60 dollar.
5 in the 40 dollar.

RoninXiC wrote:
10 in the 60 dollar.
5 in the 40 dollar.

Seems to be in line with the usual price policy of GW.

Not keen on those berzerkers, the paint job makes them look worse too if thats possible.
Whats going off with their legs ?

There seems to be a boulder in between their legs. I think this is an additional wearpon that they kick at the enemy as they advance.

It looks like a photoshop mistake almost, it doesn't seem there on the other pictures of the bezerkers.

Why is no one complaining about the over sexual male models?

One female model wears a boob guard 900 topics 5 army releases with naked buff men, not a single comment lol. People wonder why no one cares.

OgreChubbs wrote:
Why is no one complaining about the over sexual male models?

One female model wears a boob guard 900 topics 5 army releases with naked buff men, not a single comment lol. People wonder why no one cares.

This clip is about videogames but it's a similar premise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR9UMgOFeLw&feature=youtu.be&t=1m1s

While the slayers might be considered sexualized due to their nakedness, they aren't objectified. And perhaps more importantly; the clothing of these dwarves are the outlier when it comes to male miniatures, not the norm.

I don't mind it in either sex.
They give it that lovely retro look :_D

 Zywus wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
Why is no one complaining about the over sexual male models?

One female model wears a boob guard 900 topics 5 army releases with naked buff men, not a single comment lol. People wonder why no one cares.

This clip is about videogames but it's a similar premise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR9UMgOFeLw&feature=youtu.be&t=1m1s

While the slayers might be considered sexualized due to their nakedness, they aren't objectified. And perhaps more importantly; the clothing of these dwarves are the outlier when it comes to male miniatures, not the norm.

He is an idiot and talking about a mental state not a physical state. Sex, sexual ising and such is mental not physical.
If you see a child or a man dressed in a mini skirt it does not give you a second thought. But if it is someone you find sexy it is sexual.

It reminds me of a case I seen on tv about a child rapist he said the 6 year old girl was intising him and being over sexual. If you see two women in bikini's pushing each other as sexual thats a you thing not a culture thing.

I grew up around all girls and do not find girls in bikinis fighting or skirts as sexual. If you do and see it as making them over sexual that just speaks of your mind seeing women as only things to be lusted after. In short don't make a you mental state a everyone problem.

Oh dear God they look terrible I'd much rather the early 90s metals thank you very much. Thankfully there are alternatives these days that don't demand the quite frankly ridiculous price mark up of GW.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Those Salamanders would be interesting to use as indigenous creatures that live on the Space marine Chapter Salamanders planet.
Chapter master on (Bike) Salamander?

Do we know what base they are on/overall size?

Probably too big for a bike. Might work as a counts-as Imperial Knight, or an ironclad dread (or another type)

I’ve been on the fence for a while about picking up some dwarves just for use in RPG games. These guys are a little to specialized. I hope GW doesn’t drop the old boxes for these.

 hungryp wrote:
While the hair on the character sprue does look a bit better than on the infantry, the problem with the hair and flames isn't the plastic's fault, it's the design's fault. Ever since GW switched to 3D rendering in place of traditional sculpting their models have been off-puttingly blocky. One need only look to the plastic Dwarf Warriors to see that hair can be much more detailed than what we're getting now.

Na not at all Gw can still make non blocky models with their software they just need to allocate enough sprue space for it.
I love their Dark eldar Range it truly shows their mastery over casting with plastic sprues

OgreChubbs wrote:
Why is no one complaining about the over sexual male models?

One female model wears a boob guard 900 topics 5 army releases with naked buff men, not a single comment lol. People wonder why no one cares.

Ugh. Nothing derails a thread worse than fourth-wave feminism. It's practically ruined the video game community. Why poke the bear? Let's just agree that we have the agency in our own lives to decide for ourselves what is and isn't acceptable, and evangelism (on either side) of this sort is off topic.