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.

Even as generic player, I'd have no problem with buying both of them individually. Buying only a model I want and all that.

They are too big for a blister too small to be in a box alone generally not many people will field two of them in a list.

Sometimes there is no other solution.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
They are too big for a blister too small to be in a box alone generally not many people will field two of them in a list.

Sometimes there is no other solution.

Sure there is.

Don't put stuff in double boxes if they don't go together.
Simple!

 Kanluwen wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
They are too big for a blister too small to be in a box alone generally not many people will field two of them in a list.

Sometimes there is no other solution.

Sure there is.

Don't put stuff in double boxes if they don't go together.
Simple!

Yeah it might sound crazy but they could put just one TAG in one box and the other TAG in an other Box. Otherwise you basically get one TAG for the price of two...

But well, thanks to that my motivation to buy and play TAGs in general is still at about 0.05 on a scale from 0 to 10

 Kanluwen wrote:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
They are too big for a blister too small to be in a box alone generally not many people will field two of them in a list.

Sometimes there is no other solution.

Sure there is.

Don't put stuff in double boxes if they don't go together.
Simple!

I gather you have some issues reading stuff you do not want to read?

 jah-joshua wrote:
i love the ridiculous pile of tactical junk
decorated bases are the bomb, providing a setting for the miniature...
i see people using clear acrylic bases, and die a little inside

can't wait to see what the Uhlan is going to look like after Angel's magic touch...
i have been very impressed with the almost all of the TAGs so far...
they are a painter's dream, if you like stompy robots...
the original Squalo was the mini that sold me on Infinity, back when it was a new release...
i've bought nearly every TAG since then, but, sadly, they are all waiting for a place in the queue, five or ten years later :(

cheers
jah

De gustibus non est disputandum. I think the stuff detracts from the mini, and prefer minimal base decoration. It should be up to the painter to decide on the presentation of the mini. A busy base is a bad thing™.

I expect that Angel will do a masterful job on both TAGs. If the tactical garbage is optional then I'll get the TAGs, but if it is integrated into the mini, no sale here.

We'll see that Uhlan soon enough, possibly Monday or Tuesday. the TAG team is really the only release this month that interests me. (Yes, I know, it's not always about me.) Although I am curious about the Foxtrot Ranger. Chick Lean still, or will that have changed?

Anyone have news about something Bostria said about ASA getting much love? We've seen the Bagh Mari, and now the Tikbalang... what next? Montesa? Regulars (Hurley at last?)

Fat regular before fat yuan yuan? The scandal!

If some users could tone the snark riiiiiiiight down that'd be fantastic. Thanks

So it looks like the worldwide online campaign is now over?

Anyone know what the results of the whole Operation Flamestrike were?

 Alpharius wrote:
So it looks like the worldwide online campaign is now over?

Anyone know what the results of the whole Operation Flamestrike were?

Speaking of:

Yeah, I saw that - but I'm pretty much YouTube blocked at work, so I was hoping for a text summary of the results, along with the fluff/background changes and any faction buffs etc. etc. !

 jah-joshua wrote:
i love the ridiculous pile of tactical junk
decorated bases are the bomb, providing a setting for the miniature...
i see people using clear acrylic bases, and die a little inside

The "setting for the miniature" is the entire battlefield, and all of his allies and enemies. Having my Guijia dragging half a Seraph across the battlefield in the middle of a firefight with Nomads just looks silly.

Perhaps all this stuff is good for display pieces, but that's what the Bootleg line is for, IMO; the regular line are gaming pieces first.

Griping about double boxes shows a remarkable detachment from reality. In the same way that yes, you can get a starter pack even if you aren't going to use all the minis.

Why?

Infinity has like, a billion SKUs. Likely more right now than any other comparable 1st rate minis wargame, save MAYBE 40k (which mind you, has other advantages in being easy to stock and buyback programs).

You need to keep SKUs under control for many reasons in the overall distribution chain.

That's why we're going to see a lot more new starter boxes with entirely unique units that aren't getting seperate releases. It's a much more efficient way to get those out, than splitting say, the PanO box into the box, a 3x fusilier blister, an orc blister, an akal blister and a nisse blister.

It's also why linkable troops have been dropping in those 4-packs.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:
i love the ridiculous pile of tactical junk
decorated bases are the bomb, providing a setting for the miniature...
i see people using clear acrylic bases, and die a little inside

The "setting for the miniature" is the entire battlefield, and all of his allies and enemies. Having my Guijia dragging half a Seraph across the battlefield in the middle of a firefight with Nomads just looks silly.

Perhaps all this stuff is good for display pieces, but that's what the Bootleg line is for, IMO; the regular line are gaming pieces first.

the setting of the miniature is it's base, for me, because i don't play...
i do try to do a good job making my bases create a mood, and not be too busy...
if decorated bases aren't your thing, that's cool...
unfortunately, it appears that CB feel differently than you do...

that is hardly half a Seraph on the Guijia's base
besides, you can always choose not to use the detritus...
i do like that it leads to some dynamic posing, myself...

any model is a potential display piece, if that is what one is in the hobby for
Infinity sculpts certainly inspire quality paint jobs!!!
i'm sure the Uhlan will be no different...

cheers
jah

 Killionaire wrote:
Griping about double boxes shows a remarkable detachment from reality. In the same way that yes, you can get a starter pack even if you aren't going to use all the minis.

You know what else shows a "remarkable detachment from reality"?

Comparing someone "griping about double boxes" when it is two of the most desired TAGs for the PanOceanian faction, in entirely different Sectorials with no shared parts beyond the chassis, with "gettting a starter pack even if you aren't going to use all the minis".

A starter pack is that: A starter pack.
This is two entirely different Sectorials' TAGs being jammed into a double box. This isn't like the Gecko, which was somewhat palatable because hey it's a Gecko Squadron box. It was irritating that they didn't include parts to double up on weapons but...

Why?

Infinity has like, a billion SKUs. Likely more right now than any other comparable 1st rate minis wargame, save MAYBE 40k (which mind you, has other advantages in being easy to stock and buyback programs).
You need to keep SKUs under control for many reasons in the overall distribution chain.

All of that is absolute bunk. It has been proven bunk repeatedly

If they were serious about cutting down on SKUs, they would start investing in multiparting out the boxes. But they won't, because people are for whatever stupid reason happy with the status quo and think that multiparting is going to break the bank for CB.

That's why we're going to see a lot more new starter boxes with entirely unique units that aren't getting seperate releases. It's a much more efficient way to get those out, than splitting say, the PanO box into the box, a 3x fusilier blister, an orc blister, an akal blister and a nisse blister.

Um, no. That's the way it literally has always been:
Starter box gets released, has "exclusive" sculpts. Most of the components would get parted out later, but there'd still be something left JUST in the box(Chasseur to use the most pertinent and awful example. That is a model that SK refuses to split box, as the rest of the box just rots).

And for the record? They were perfectly happy back in the day to release the PanO box, a 3x Fusilier blister, an ORC blister, etc.

It's also why linkable troops have been dropping in those 4-packs.

Yeeeahh...no. Linkable troops have been dropping in 4 packs because they are refusing to do blisters for many things these days. They'd rather pull an old school GW and release a box then make people convert the stuff than release the models.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeeeahh...no. Linkable troops have been dropping in 4 packs because they are refusing to do blisters for many things these days. They'd rather pull an old school GW and release a box then make people convert the stuff than release the models.

So that's why blisters keep releasing every month, because they refuse to do them for anything. It all makes sense!

It's worth trying to make your statement make sense sometimes.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Yeeeahh...no. Linkable troops have been dropping in 4 packs because they are refusing to do blisters for many things these days. They'd rather pull an old school GW and release a box then make people convert the stuff than release the models.

So that's why blisters keep releasing every month, because they refuse to do them for anything. It all makes sense!

It's worth trying to make your statement make sense sometimes.

Because "refusing to do blisters for many things" equates to "they refuse to do blisters period", right?

If you want a run a link team of Bolts you need Bolt SWC box and NCA starter box. They did put blisters for a limited time, same with Santiagos.

I am not and will not be fan of this practice. It's for CB benefit only.

Kan... CB will do things the way they feel is best for the company not the things you feel is best for yourself, incidentally the things you feel are best for yourself most of the time would be disastrous for the company and the consumer.

Like it or hate it there are stuff that are not possible and most of your demands could be equated in "why CB does not make boring, blunt, undynamic, poseable, multipart models like GW" and "why dont they create a gazillion sku that are a logistics nightmare so I can cherry pick what model I will buy, if I ever buy it"

In any case to say it again to you both mini TAGs are too big to be in a blister release and too small to be a in a box alone and frankly very few would buy a box of two Ulhans or two Tikbalangs, making a box of each is a really logical choice.

If all we are griping about is how CB box their minis it shows what an awesome game Infinity is. Check out the 40k general forum...

As an NCA player who only has access to the Uhlan I've got no problem with paying for the Tikbalang as well, as it gives me the option for taking it in vanilla or Acontecimento if I want to try out new things. Having said that I also bought the Jotum purely out of awesomeness but have only ever used it once, so maybe I'm a TAG head.

Honestly, I fully expect to see eBay and the infinity trader FB groups inundated with Uhlans and Tikbalangs in the very near future, as those people who bought the box without a desire to branch out, sectorially speaking, or without a local friend to go halves with unload their extras.

While it'll probably lead to increased spend on CB, I get the feeling it would have been better for the company to package them individually.

Incidentally, the argument that they're too small to box individually is utter bunk; CB boxed the Penny bootleg on her own and she is S4. It might have been slightly more expensive for them to do it, but since Geckos are ~£35 and Penny is ~£12, they could easily have priced them at ~£18-20 individually.
(not that it really matters to me, I'll be buying, painting and playing with both)

I care how I spend my money and what I gain for it. The costs that a company has with making a product aren't my problems.

If all we are griping about is how CB box their minis it shows what an awesome game Infinity is.

Most relevant or potentially interesting discussions die or go on pointless infinite loop. Game/community (-ties) used to be really well and fun.

So, was Operation Flamestrike not as big a thing as we thought it was going to be?

I haven't seen much on it at all, especially now that it is all over?

I don't think the Uhlan + Tikbalang is a sensible pairing for a box set, but...

 Kanluwen wrote:

Why?

Infinity has like, a billion SKUs. Likely more right now than any other comparable 1st rate minis wargame, save MAYBE 40k (which mind you, has other advantages in being easy to stock and buyback programs).
You need to keep SKUs under control for many reasons in the overall distribution chain.

All of that is absolute bunk. It has been proven bunk repeatedly

At least go and speak to some retailers before saying stuff like this.

 IJW wrote:
I don't think the Uhlan + Tikbalang is a sensible pairing for a box set, but...

 Kanluwen wrote:

Why?

Infinity has like, a billion SKUs. Likely more right now than any other comparable 1st rate minis wargame, save MAYBE 40k (which mind you, has other advantages in being easy to stock and buyback programs).
You need to keep SKUs under control for many reasons in the overall distribution chain.

All of that is absolute bunk. It has been proven bunk repeatedly

At least go and speak to some retailers before saying stuff like this.

I have. And unlike you, they didn't seem to have any issues with the SKUs.
What they had issues with was there not being any reliable way for retailers here in the US to get a "list of suggested products" from CB themselves until relatively recently.

 Alpharius wrote:
So, was Operation Flamestrike not as big a thing as we thought it was going to be?

I haven't seen much on it at all, especially now that it is all over?

Whaaat, an international campaign amounts to nothing?

You were the chosen ones, CB!

Didn't the net campaign end just a few weeks ago? I imagine they have to sift through results and find a way to make it marketable before we hear back

 Kanluwen wrote:
I have. And unlike you, they didn't seem to have any issues with the SKUs.

It's possible that the US market is that drastically different to Europe, where I've chatted to retailers and distributors across multiple countries, but I know for certain that it's also a concern in the US trade: http://blackdiamondgames.blogspot.com/2014/02/miniature-sku-creep-tradecraft.html

 Kanluwen wrote:
What they had issues with was there not being any reliable way for retailers here in the US to get a "list of suggested products" from CB themselves until relatively recently.

They certainly had one 5-6 years ago that would be sent out to retailers that emailed them, but obviously things may have changed since then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Meanwhile, back on topic...

 Alpharius wrote:
So, was Operation Flamestrike not as big a thing as we thought it was going to be?

I haven't seen much on it at all, especially now that it is all over?

There's been a fair amount of discussion on the CB forums, but I believe any substantial fluff references to it are slated for the next book.

BoW has had their bit on the Operation Flamestrike reults




and their 'AI Historians' adjusted roundup

 Killionaire wrote:
Griping about double boxes shows a remarkable detachment from reality. In the same way that yes, you can get a starter pack even if you aren't going to use all the minis.

Why?

The reality is that it is very simple to put extra bits enabling alternate loadouts in the box in the first place instead of having two models with two different loadouts and that the decision to do so is driven not from a quality perspective or production simplicity standpoint but rather profit driven. They *WANT* you to buy two boxes of two models to get the two loadouts you actually want (or two trade with others if you're lucky enough to find someone who wants the loadout you don't like). Companies have been putting alterate loadout bits in boxes for metal miniatures for decades without any issues. It's not a "remarkable detachment from reality" but rather simply looking at the issue from a consumer standpoint.

Could someone explain to me the reason why they couldn't be two boxes? Is there like a minimum volume you have to put in a box for it to be worth it? Because many infantry boxes probably have less metal in them than a single gecko-sized tag.