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.

 Malisteen wrote:
'can be posed' isn't a bonus if it results in a model that is listless and lifeless no matter how you put it together. For heroes, monopose is better where it allows that pose to be dynamic, energetic, lively, and engaged.

You may not like GW's design choices in terms of style/cartoonishness/whatever. I might even agree with you on that front. But that shadow warrior is neither modern nor highly detailed. It's lifeless. Try Wyrd maybe for a better comparison - though then you're back to GW level prices.

Ah... I understand now.
Running/prancing/balancing on tendrils triples the price.

Got it.

I don't know how you can look at those two sprues and not think they're 20 years apart.

As said above, I would expect the top sprue quality to be in an old GW troop pack of 10 or 20 models, but that doesn't mean I love the price of current GW character models.

I don't care if it's multipose if every one of those poses is bad, as they are for this model. Just looking at the sprue, every way you could build it would be 'leaning a little this way, or a little that way, neither standing firm nor running, neither attacking nor defending, torso rigid and square regardless of which way the legs are leaning or arms are reaching. The shadow warrior's pose will be utterly uncommitted and without character no matter how you assemble it, and that is not good for a character model. That's the trade off for multi-pose models, and in this case it is a bad trade.

That on top of having little detail, and what detail it has is soft and indistinct and again uncommitted. Lines that don't mean anything. The guns are just bad. The blades, again, are on the level of 1998 dark eldar warriors.

I'm sorry, but It just isn't a good model. Not as a stand alone character, not by today's standards. I'd say you get what you pay for, but I wouldn't pay $5 for that model, let alone $9.


You don't like GW's style. That's fine. It's too cartoony. The muscle definition is generally pretty bad in terms of anatomy. These new dwarves in particular rely over much on symmetrical mirroring in CAD, leaving many of the models (though not so much the one you chose) static and just weirdly off as a result (the squad leader from the box of 10 in particular suffers from this). There's a lot to criticize there, I'm not trying to defend GW and certainly not their prices.

But those criticisms are mostly about stylistic choices. If you want something of a different style but the same level of quality, that's fine, but your choices are limited, and the model you put forward doesn't even come close. Again, I would suggest some of Wyrd's stuff, but that's much closer to GW prices, in some cases noticeably higher.

@Coldgaming to be fair, forum price complaining does sometimes take the seventh day to rest. not often though, sadly. Although 7 weeks into joining forums I must admit with Warseer down still I feel like, and I don't mean this in a hard way, there's less negativity cloud hanging over my hobby. Just went to the store to buy a box of Vulkite Berzerkeers and darned if not everyone in there was laughing and enjoying the hobby without any bi$&@ing.

@all... I have to admit, GW spoiled us, ok, me for this post. As a dwarf collector I bought from many many lines but on only a few occasions could I not bring myself to buy a model I didn't like, no matter how cheap or what from manufacturer. My cohost slowly sold me on Mantic when the shift was that Mantic really shines when you have a full army. Units over singular model. That helped to recalibrate how I looked at models.

But Wargaming is a very visual hobby and for me the scene I witness unfolding before me during a game is most important, so you get what you pay for. Like just about every Wargamer out there I too would love for GW prices to be lower, much lower. But for me and just about every fellow hobbyist I talk to agrees despite cost GW makes the best models out there. So even when cheaper models are available I can't help but compare to GW and realize, like it or not, buy it or not, I'm still spoiled by just how dang good their products are, although many disagree on what's good and bad about any sculpt.

Even at the tournament scene in US it's unfortunate that often you can't even give the lower quality stuff away. Not naming names but some companies sponsor events and do gift, swag bags and even donate prize support and if any of you are familiar with the raffle, prize table selection by the time those last few products from other lines are passed up for a bottle of water or tossed to the youngest player in the room it's awkward but too bad,

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 Malisteen wrote:
'can be posed' isn't a bonus if it results in a model that is listless and lifeless no matter how you put it together. For heroes, monopose is better where it allows that pose to be dynamic, energetic, lively, and engaged.

You may not like GW's design choices in terms of style/cartoonishness/whatever. I might even agree with you on that front. But that shadow warrior is neither modern nor highly detailed. It's lifeless. Try Wyrd maybe for a better comparison - though then you're back to GW level prices.

Ah... I understand now.
Running/prancing/balancing on tendrils triples the price.

Got it.

You have missed the point. I don't even like the Dwarf, but the Shadow Walker isn't a good comparison on value. It's "multipose" is extremely limited, the waist joint is just a flat surface so you're massively limited on poses that will actually look good (you can maybe twist the torso a few degrees either way, but really not much). Same with the arms, there's a very limited number of positions you can place them in before they start to look horribly unnatural. Both the leg options are flat footed, relatively neutrally posed with simply one knee or the other slightly bent. It's a simpler and cheaper way to design a sprue and how plastics were done in the 90's.

I would describe the Shadow Walker as "multipart" not "multipose". And the pose it's in feels very limited by the casting rather than GW's recent models which manage to intelligently design the sprue layout in a way that overcomes the limitations of the casting (whether you do or don't like the poses, many of them I don't like, but I can't help but appreciate the though that went in to making them.

I know the Shadow Walker isn't trying to be excessively detailed, which makes it a hard comparison even at the best of times because the subject matter itself is very different. BUT, there's a reason people are saying the Shadow Walker looks like a 90's era kit, because that's what GW plastics looked like in the 90's Compare the sprues from Space Hulk 1996 to Space Hulk 2009/2014, it's not just the level of detail that's different, it's how sharp that detail is and how the sprues are laid out to give characterful poses in the more modern kits.

I don't even like GW's new stunties and ESPECIALLY don't like the price on them, but the Shadow Walker is not a good comparison either way.

 VeteranNoob wrote:
I have to admit, GW spoiled us, ok, me for this post. As a dwarf collector I bought from many many lines but on only a few occasions could I not bring myself to buy a model I didn't like, no matter how cheap or what from manufacturer. My cohost slowly sold me on Mantic when the shift was that Mantic really shines when you have a full army. Units over singular model. That helped to recalibrate how I looked at models.

This is an important point. GW models, entirely apart from being kind of painfully expensive on their own, are an especially poor fit for the battle scale, regimental game that Warhammer Fantasy was. Having to buy hundreds of models makes a premium price on individual models unsustainable. Having to paint hundreds of models makes highly detailed, busy figures go from being a good thing to a very bad thing very quickly, as the cost in time and effort are multiplied while the benefit in cooler looking models vanishes since nobody's going to look at the figure in the third rank of the fourth file of a big unit anyway. Dynamic poses, even when they do rank up, just look bad in rank & file units (although multi-pose figures also look bad ranked up - compare tomb kings skeletons to vamp counts skeletons to see how much better the latter, lock-stepped units look in formation).

Higher quality is not always the better choice. For mass battle or regiment scale games, quantity is not just more important than finer quality, what constitutes finer quality in individual models can itself can be a bad thing.

 VeteranNoob wrote:
But for me and just about every fellow hobbyist agrees despite cost GW makes the best models out there.

I'm not sure what models you've been exposed to, but I strongly disagree with this. For quite some time, I've chosen to buy a (lesser number of) more expensive models, rather than what I see as GW's lower quality models when compared to most other resin manufacturers.

Since I'm also a dwarf player, one example is these minis, which I just love and think are full of character lacking in some GW dwarfs - they almost have a Rackham vibe to them:



You can see more here:
http://sirenminiatures.com/store/faction/dwarfs

I also have a lot of Forgeworld's chaos dwarfs, and think they're really superior to the standard GW ones, and actually now cheaper than these new dwarfs - at current exchange rates, it's $5.60 per model for the chaos dwarfs (or $5.33 if you get the large bundle including characters). The point being, that at the same or sometimes even lower price point, you can get finely detailed resin figures, and for a long time I've been making this choice and getting higher quality figures as a result.

I will say that I'm interested in GW's injection molded plastic characters (I picked up the Runemaster, for instance) since they overcome the limitations of injection molding by breaking them up into enough pieces to retain a lot of great posing and detail. But this is not true of their basic troops, and I think the recent dwarf troop releases are really lacking from a technical standpoint due to making them easy to injection mold.

Yeah, GW's offerings aren't necessarily the best models out there (and in particular I find the fyreslayers somewhat lackluster - though those who dislike the cartoony/over designed GW style aren't likely to go in for Siren's dwarves, either), but the alternatives that compete with them on quality are also generally similar in price range.

I totally agree that many alternatives are similar in price range (sometimes more, sometimes less). But as you say, my point is that GW are actually quite often not the best quality models.

I'm willing to pay a lot for a character model, but I also have a lot of options on that front now... which is a very good thing!

Regarding the Siren dwarfs - I think what sets them apart from the Fyreslayers for me is that imo they are much more technically well done (such as their muscles, that bedroll on his back, etc). I love their style even though I dislike much of the Fyreslayers. However, one thing I do really like about the Fyreslayers is those "blunderbuss" like weapons! Wish I could steal them / buy them separately for my chaos dwarfs

In the end, imo what used to set GW apart was their ability to create awesome rank and file models, where it was difficult for others to compete due to injection molding... but the rank and file in this release were extremely weak, imo, and if that continues it will erode what advantage GW has on the quality front over resin manufacturers.

 RiTides wrote:

 VeteranNoob wrote:
But for me and just about every fellow hobbyist agrees despite cost GW makes the best models out there.

I'm not sure what models you've been exposed to, but I strongly disagree with this. For quite some time, I've chosen to buy a (lesser number of) more expensive models, rather than what I see as GW's lower quality models when compared to most other resin manufacturers.

Since I'm also a dwarf player, one example is these minis, which I just love and think are full of character lacking in some GW dwarfs - they almost have a Rackham vibe to them:



You can see more here:
http://sirenminiatures.com/store/faction/dwarfs

I also have a lot of Forgeworld's chaos dwarfs, and think they're really superior to the standard GW ones, and actually now cheaper than these new dwarfs - at current exchange rates, it's $5.60 per model for the chaos dwarfs (or $5.33 if you get the large bundle including characters). The point being, that at the same or sometimes even lower price point, you can get finely detailed resin figures, and for a long time I've been making this choice and getting higher quality figures as a result.

I will say that I'm interested in GW's injection molded plastic characters (I picked up the Runemaster, for instance) since they overcome the limitations of injection molding by breaking them up into enough pieces to retain a lot of great posing and detail. But this is not true of their basic troops, and I think the recent dwarf troop releases are really lacking from a technical standpoint due to making them easy to injection mold.

Figured it wouldn't be everybody I have seen these and I just don't care for them at all. Even Black Flag or something like that have some great dwarfs on their website but when they arrived I was a tad disappointed in overall scale and personality. But we each like our own, like even though 8th Ed. dwarfs are pretty killer IMO I love the look of the Maruder dwarf clans men and especially slayers.

And I should clarify when I said GW that includes FW. I almost typed that in the previous post. Sorry for the confusion. Thanks for sharing the line and your thoughts though

The Fyreslayers are doing much more for me as I have them in hand and building, though the vulkit berserker kit is the worst by far. I do like the magma pikes and you should totally steal them for CD use

Well, if you include Forgeworld I'd agree in large part . They have some amazing releases, although much more for 40K.

However, I think if you look at Forgeworld it really does become directly comparable to a whole world of resin mini manufacturers, which can actually be done in someone's basement or garage (Wehrkind on Dakka does just that ) and is basically the exact same process of casting (and many actually exceed Forgeworld in quality).

So, at that point it really comes down to the sculpt, and companies like Mierce Miniatures now commission sculpts from folks who are even more technically gifted than those GW employs, or sometimes even employ former GW sculptors! So, there's no real claim to be made that they make the "best" minis, when the same or even better sculptors are making minis for others, cast to the same or higher quality in resin.

Since I'm talking Chaos Dwarfs, here's another example I recently ordered, this time from Willy Miniatures:



http://willyminiatures.com/product/bull-centaurs/

There has been widespread dislike from chaos dwarf players of the Bull Centaurs Forgeworld released (they are actually technically well done, just way too large!!). This one is intended for Bloodbowl, but obviously GW might be bringing that back now, too . The point is just that if you're looking at Forgeworld models, look at other resin manufacturers too, some of the third party miniatures are literally just amazing

That model above looks like a mess to me, but to each his own.

A lot of good points are made, but I find we are going in circles. Some people will say GW is expensive, while others will say it's not. Then the people who disagree have a tendency that they need to be proven wrong. Is GW expensive? Yes and No. For a lot of people GW is expensive and would like to have cheaper prices. For others GW is not expensive at all and are content to keep giving GW their business. So who is right and who is wrong? Nobody is wrong.

I believe the question that should be asked is, is GW worth it?

A lot of debates is that GW is to expensive. If that is the case why are we all not buying $10 000 cars? Why are we buying $30 000 or even $100 000+ cars? We are not buying $10 000 cars because we find more VALUE in the $30 000, $100 000+ cars. We are not finding no value in having a $10 000 car.

If GW is so expensive why are we not going to the dollar store and buying plastic toy soldiers there? It's so much cheaper and I haven't seen ANYONE play with Dollar Store plastic toy soldiers. Forget about GW. People talk about other companies like Mantic. Compared to Dollar Store prices, $1 or even $2 a bag you almost get a full army or at least a good sized detachment. So about $10 you can have a full army. So that would mean Mantic and other companies are way over priced as well. So why are we not fielding Dollar Store armies then if they are so cheap? It's not WORTH it. So next time Person A says GW is expensive and there is cheaper alternatives, Person B can say there is more cheaper alternative to the cheaper alternative. So does that make the person A wrong then? After all if you are trying to say you are correct that GW is expensive and you shouldn't buy it, then that would mean that person who says Mantic is cheaper is wrong as well because there is another cheaper alternative to that as well.

So the question for me is worth. Is GW worth it? As a player, no GW is not worth it to me anymore. Why? I don't want to be paying $100 for a fluff book. Why will I not pay $100 for a fluff book? GW has shown me they don't support their product. GW has shown me that they keep making new books and what you buy now, can be invalid next year. GW has also shown me that they don't even know their own rules. Reading their advertisement that we have to pay for, White Dwarf a lot of times, they don't even follow their own rules. That leads to confusion among the community. Community, another part where GW doesn't support. FAQs. A lot of times, GW puts out FAQs that nobody even asks, and the questions that people are asking GW a lot of times don't answer. So with no support, becoming invalid in a year or two, for me the price of $100 is not worth it to me.

Now we can talk about rule books as well. Since a lot of us use to play we have spent the $50, $75 or even $100 for the rules. Problem again is the same for the fluff book as I mentioned. Why do I want to keep buying a new edition when there is no support, no idea what may or may not happen because GW doesn't keep in touch with their fans/customers/ shoddy writing and not very fun rules. That caused a lot of people to quit playing GW. So right there is why GW for me is not worth buying. I bought the iPad version of 6th edition 40K rule book. 3 months later 7th edition came out. WTF is what we all said. I thought for sure I would have a good 2 years out of the 6th edition I just bought. Oh well. I did buy 7th edition but problem is, nobody is playing 40K anymore. So now I can't game.

As a person who models very slowly, is GW worth it? Yes and No. No because since I don't buy their books I am not getting into their fluff and not buying as much as I would be. Yes because GW does make some good kits that I like and buy them. For example my wife bought me the 3 sigmarnies with wings. Lucky for me, I was able to return it since I don't find any worth for paying $75 for 3 minis that I can't even find a game in. So I spend even more money, bought an Imperial Knight and slowly converting it into a Chaos Knight. Why would I pay almost $250 for ONE mini instead of $75 for 3 minis? After all that is cheaper right? I find it more worth in the one mini because I am enjoying modeling it. I am enjoying painting it. So for me it's WORTH it.

I don't mind paying a premium price. Thing is, I expect a premium product. I expect the rules to be almost perfect. I know there is no such thing as perfect rules but when each book that comes out for 40K and people are finding issues, people are arguing, not debating but arguing on how a rule should be shows right there, GW can't or won't make a solid, comprehensive ruleset. Thing is, I want a solid comprehensive ruleset. I don't mind paying a premium price for it, so it means having less coffee for the week, or saving for an extra month, so be it. It will be worth it in the end. Sadly right now, it's not worth it for me to save the extra month since I will not be getting the enjoyment out of it.

TL;DR

Question should be is GW worth it, not that GW is expensive. After all if we are saying there is cheaper products out there, we all would be fielding Dollar Store plastic toy soldiers. We don't find value in Dollar Store plastic toy soldiers so we pay more for what we find value in. Problem is, GW did a good job at taking out the value in their products with poor/bad written rules, no support and less than a year cycle for some codices that there in no value in what GW makes now.

 RiTides wrote:
Well, if you include Forgeworld I'd agree in large part . They have some amazing releases, although much more for 40K.

However, I think if you look at Forgeworld it really does become directly comparable to a whole world of resin mini manufacturers, which can actually be done in someone's basement or garage (Wehrkind on Dakka does just that ) and is basically the exact same process of casting (and many actually exceed Forgeworld in quality).

So, at that point it really comes down to the sculpt, and companies like Mierce Miniatures now commission sculpts from folks who are even more technically gifted than those GW employs, or sometimes even employ former GW sculptors! So, there's no real claim to be made that they make the "best" minis, when the same or even better sculptors are making minis for others, cast to the same or higher quality in resin.

Since I'm talking Chaos Dwarfs, here's another example I recently ordered, this time from Willy Miniatures:



http://willyminiatures.com/product/bull-centaurs/

There has been widespread dislike from chaos dwarf players of the Bull Centaurs Forgeworld released (they are actually technically well done, just way too large!!). This one is intended for Bloodbowl, but obviously GW might be bringing that back now, too . The point is just that if you're looking at Forgeworld models, look at other resin manufacturers too, some of the third party miniatures are literally just amazing

These look pretty good. Reminds me of the Blood Bowl CD team I got from Comixinos via an IndieGoGo a few years back. Great alternate sculpts and any new aesthetically pleasing CD is always a good thing IMO. But it all comes down to opinion really I'm not arguing to convert anyone nor would I expect that to be targeted at me. If anything, these discussions only benefit us all by intriducing new lines and models...which of course is harmful as perils of the wallet

I expect some folks on some forums to disagree on the overall quality and when discussed like this it brings new hobby opportunities. I still think the GW models are overall with sculpts, details, materials, sprue cutting, etc. are the best in the world though, but we can agree to disagree there. Meirce ( if autocorrect would let me type it) has some great stuff too!

Yep, that's totally reasonable, VeteranNoob . Cheers for the great and open-minded discussion!

If there was ever a question to why Warhammer Fantasy died, it's because we went from this:



To:



Nothing about the current range of models justifies them being twice or in some cases three times as much as what older models cost. The death of cheap Regiment sets and the game meta requiring $125 horde formation units are what ruined WHFB.

I'm building my current Undead army near exclusively from 5th/6th edition models for insanely cheap prices on eBay. They were great. The characters had so much... character to them. They were sculpted by hand, not a machine. I really think that adds to them. Old Wraiths, Grave Guard, Black Knights and Vampires are in my opinion worlds ahead of the current ones.

 RiTides wrote:
Yep, that's totally reasonable, VeteranNoob . Cheers for the great and open-minded discussion!

l
And to you, good sir gah, now more dwarfs I have to try and find a way to not buy until I can at least use eventually on the table top. Returning to the days of every unit model unique, no double poses. I thought my all female dwarf warrior unit would be limited at 10 but now it's a horde of about 40!

Anyway, this thread is a hot mess but maybe I should start a dwarf thread to just chuck new model lines in so we can see what's come out over the past few years. I'm new to Dakka, so would the dakka discussions be the best spot for that thread since it's not necessarily AoS, but could be KoW, blood bowl, 9th Age, Mantic warpath, even just collecting?

I think the other thing here is that - to a greater extent than other companies - GW's pricing has also always had the 'Hero' effect.
The less you're likely to need, the more they cost.
If you look at a clampack character purely in terms of amount of plastic then they will look expensive even when compared like with like.
Take any power armour marine character and compare to a tac squad marine, for example.
WIth AoS I think that this logic is going further, and has what's led to some people thinking that $ of unit is the balancing mechanic.
Looking at the Stormcast, Fyreslayers or the Bloodbound as proof of this - basic troops compared to elite troops - even though they're pretty much the same size minis - the elite models cost more per mini. I'm certainly convinced it's not coincidental.

I'm not 'surprised' by the cost of GW minis, though I do wonder about some of the clampack prices sometimes. But relative to other systems, they aren't that out of whack and where they are, I'm happy with the comparative quality to still shell out for GW over others for my needs.

I definitely think this would be the right section for it, VeteranNoob! You might just want to put in the title that it's a thread for Dwarfs from all model lines - people might want to use some for Aos, after all and ranked fantasy discussion (such as 8th edition or 9th age) still belongs here, too.

It's actually in the forum descriptions now on the main page for each subforum here (listed as "legacy WHFB" there). So, a discussion of all dwarf manufacturers is totally appropriate if given its own thread!

Davor wrote:
A lot of good points are made, but I find we are going in circles. Some people will say GW is expensive, while others will say it's not. Then the people who disagree have a tendency that they need to be proven wrong. Is GW expensive? Yes and No. For a lot of people GW is expensive and would like to have cheaper prices. For others GW is not expensive at all and are content to keep giving GW their business. So who is right and who is wrong? Nobody is wrong.

I believe the question that should be asked is, is GW worth it?

A lot of debates is that GW is to expensive. If that is the case why are we all not buying $10 000 cars? Why are we buying $30 000 or even $100 000+ cars? We are not buying $10 000 cars because we find more VALUE in the $30 000, $100 000+ cars. We are not finding no value in having a $10 000 car.

If GW is so expensive why are we not going to the dollar store and buying plastic toy soldiers there? It's so much cheaper and I haven't seen ANYONE play with Dollar Store plastic toy soldiers. Forget about GW. People talk about other companies like Mantic. Compared to Dollar Store prices, $1 or even $2 a bag you almost get a full army or at least a good sized detachment. So about $10 you can have a full army. So that would mean Mantic and other companies are way over priced as well. So why are we not fielding Dollar Store armies then if they are so cheap? It's not WORTH it. So next time Person A says GW is expensive and there is cheaper alternatives, Person B can say there is more cheaper alternative to the cheaper alternative. So does that make the person A wrong then? After all if you are trying to say you are correct that GW is expensive and you shouldn't buy it, then that would mean that person who says Mantic is cheaper is wrong as well because there is another cheaper alternative to that as well.

So the question for me is worth. Is GW worth it? As a player, no GW is not worth it to me anymore. Why? I don't want to be paying $100 for a fluff book. Why will I not pay $100 for a fluff book? GW has shown me they don't support their product. GW has shown me that they keep making new books and what you buy now, can be invalid next year. GW has also shown me that they don't even know their own rules. Reading their advertisement that we have to pay for, White Dwarf a lot of times, they don't even follow their own rules. That leads to confusion among the community. Community, another part where GW doesn't support. FAQs. A lot of times, GW puts out FAQs that nobody even asks, and the questions that people are asking GW a lot of times don't answer. So with no support, becoming invalid in a year or two, for me the price of $100 is not worth it to me.

Now we can talk about rule books as well. Since a lot of us use to play we have spent the $50, $75 or even $100 for the rules. Problem again is the same for the fluff book as I mentioned. Why do I want to keep buying a new edition when there is no support, no idea what may or may not happen because GW doesn't keep in touch with their fans/customers/ shoddy writing and not very fun rules. That caused a lot of people to quit playing GW. So right there is why GW for me is not worth buying. I bought the iPad version of 6th edition 40K rule book. 3 months later 7th edition came out. WTF is what we all said. I thought for sure I would have a good 2 years out of the 6th edition I just bought. Oh well. I did buy 7th edition but problem is, nobody is playing 40K anymore. So now I can't game.

As a person who models very slowly, is GW worth it? Yes and No. No because since I don't buy their books I am not getting into their fluff and not buying as much as I would be. Yes because GW does make some good kits that I like and buy them. For example my wife bought me the 3 sigmarnies with wings. Lucky for me, I was able to return it since I don't find any worth for paying $75 for 3 minis that I can't even find a game in. So I spend even more money, bought an Imperial Knight and slowly converting it into a Chaos Knight. Why would I pay almost $250 for ONE mini instead of $75 for 3 minis? After all that is cheaper right? I find it more worth in the one mini because I am enjoying modeling it. I am enjoying painting it. So for me it's WORTH it.

I don't mind paying a premium price. Thing is, I expect a premium product. I expect the rules to be almost perfect. I know there is no such thing as perfect rules but when each book that comes out for 40K and people are finding issues, people are arguing, not debating but arguing on how a rule should be shows right there, GW can't or won't make a solid, comprehensive ruleset. Thing is, I want a solid comprehensive ruleset. I don't mind paying a premium price for it, so it means having less coffee for the week, or saving for an extra month, so be it. It will be worth it in the end. Sadly right now, it's not worth it for me to save the extra month since I will not be getting the enjoyment out of it.

TL;DR

Question should be is GW worth it, not that GW is expensive. After all if we are saying there is cheaper products out there, we all would be fielding Dollar Store plastic toy soldiers. We don't find value in Dollar Store plastic toy soldiers so we pay more for what we find value in. Problem is, GW did a good job at taking out the value in their products with poor/bad written rules, no support and less than a year cycle for some codices that there in no value in what GW makes now.

I think that's fair, though like most of this there's no hardline fact, only opinions your post made me think about this though and why I spend what I do on GW products & tbh I see it as part of the social experience and why I love this hobby so much. The fluff I can read and enjoy on my own, though I can also make use of this for podcasting and interviewing the authors, which is my favorite part. For the rule books mostly I justify them not for being competitive or because I love the gaming world so much (even though my most Favorite world is just s memory now), but because I justify it as part of game events--from weekly game night to fun weekend events.

The gaming experience, that social experience and imagining of my fantasy or sci-fi world is the payout. Do I need every book? No. I'm not competitive so that doesn't play into it, but the more I know about the gaming world the better experience I have at these games. I chuckle sympathetically to your 40k rules statement because I almost bought it, the iTunes page had a lag which ended up saving me that purchase . I generally like to buy all the books even though realistically I rarely get to read them all these days. And with 40K last year I just backed off at that rate of release vs. weekly game night and only got the codecies I really wanted. It's a good question you posted for discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 RiTides wrote:
I definitely think this would be the right section for it, VeteranNoob! You might just want to put in the title that it's a thread for Dwarfs from all model lines - people might want to use some for Aos, after all and ranked fantasy discussion (such as 8th edition or 9th age) still belongs here, too.

It's actually in the forum descriptions now on the main page for each subforum here (listed as "legacy WHFB" there). So, a discussion of all dwarf manufacturers is totally appropriate if given its own thread!

Cheers, thanks. Seems like fantasy legacy is the best place.

coldgaming wrote:
I wouldn't call those the same quality. The top one looks like a troop kit not a character. They look like they're in totally different ballparks.

I prefer the top sprue to the IMO ludicrous positioned huge weaponed unecessary stuff on the bottom.

thekingofkings wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
I wouldn't call those the same quality. The top one looks like a troop kit not a character. They look like they're in totally different ballparks.

I prefer the top sprue to the IMO ludicrous positioned huge weaponed unecessary stuff on the bottom.

You're certainly allowed to dislike the bottom model on style, but that's a pretty subjective thing. They're still not comparable pieces, and the top one is still the sort of thing GW was putting out 15 to 20 years ago. The kind of thing I'd expect to see in a box of 10 or 20 for $30 to $40, not as a one off character model for $9. It's also not so much a 'multipose model' as it is two static pose models but the designer deliberately shorted you a second head that could easily have fit on the same sprue with the same amount of plastic.

A better comparison than the berzerker hero would be putting the shadow guy next to the empire free company (20 for $35; less than $2 per model) or Cadian Shock Troops (10 for $29; less than $3 per model), or Kabalite Warriors (10 for $29; less than $3 per model). Those kits are much closer to this one in terms of design, level of detail, pose & proportion, etc. The Kabalites are even similar in aesthetic design style. They have similar strengths and weaknesses as models, and are all round in a similar ballpark in terms of technical proficiency on display. Notably, most of those kits are all 10 or more years old. Notably they're all considerably cheaper per model. The more recent ones also boast better proportions and crisper details.

It happens that I like every one of those kits better than the new fyreslayers, but that's for subjective stylistic reasons, I can't argue that they're even close to the same technical level. Just like I might prefer Mantic's dwarves to Siren's stylistically, but I can't honestly claim they're in anywhere near the same ballpark, technically, nor can I put a cheaper Mantic dwarf next to a more expensive Siren model and claim the comparison as objective proof that the latter is overpriced.

I could use a comparison to their LOTR/Hobbit line which is now after divorcing AoS the only product line from GW I will still buy, they are very overpriced but the detail is IMO Much better.

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Battlesmiths $30
vs
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Nori-Dori-Gloin-Dwarf-Champions-of-Erebor $40

but I also stand by my statement, if I could buy one or the other ( I play neither game, actually have no idea what the first one is) I would still buy the top one because I think it looks better and is a better value for my money

 Malisteen wrote:

thekingofkings wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
I wouldn't call those the same quality. The top one looks like a troop kit not a character. They look like they're in totally different ballparks.

I prefer the top sprue to the IMO ludicrous positioned huge weaponed unecessary stuff on the bottom.

You're certainly allowed to dislike the bottom model on style, but that's a pretty subjective thing. They're still not comparable pieces, and the top one is still the sort of thing GW was putting out 15 to 20 years ago. The kind of thing I'd expect to see in a box of 10 or 20 for $30 to $40, not as a one off character model for $9. It's also not so much a 'multipose model' as it is two static pose models but the designer deliberately shorted you a second head that could easily have fit on the same sprue with the same amount of plastic.

A better comparison than the berzerker hero would be putting the shadow guy next to the empire free company (20 for $35; less than $2 per model) or Cadian Shock Troops (10 for $29; less than $3 per model), or Kabalite Warriors (10 for $29; less than $3 per model). Those kits are much closer to this one in terms of design, level of detail, pose & proportion, etc. The Kabalites are even similar in aesthetic design style. They have similar strengths and weaknesses as models, and are all round in a similar ballpark in terms of technical proficiency on display. Notably, most of those kits are all 10 or more years old. Notably they're all considerably cheaper per model. The more recent ones also boast better proportions and crisper details.

It happens that I like every one of those kits better than the new fyreslayers, but that's for subjective stylistic reasons, I can't argue that they're even close to the same technical level. Just like I might prefer Mantic's dwarves to Siren's stylistically, but I can't honestly claim they're in anywhere near the same ballpark, technically, nor can I put a cheaper Mantic dwarf next to a more expensive Siren model and claim the comparison as objective proof that the latter is overpriced.

Well, what I was getting at, was comparing quality of the mold/sprue. As I said earlier I bought a box of Seraphon Saurus warriors. Boxed as new from GW last week. I've managed to make 4 models so far. Incidentally, each model took longer to clean up than Mantic's original Deadzone restic models I have. Every Saurus warrior had horrendous mold lines running down their spine through every single spinal spike. I spent more time on clean up than I did painting them. The Shadow walker had next to none of this. That's what i was talking about quality of sprue - not your self appointed opinion that it looks like a troop. I'm sure the GW berzerker is just as good in terms of clean mold lines and I know you'll tell me the Saurus warriors are "old" - but it was the cost we were looking at. Two new spues, using comparable technology, one at triple the price.

I'm not a GW "h8er". I've run a 40k club at the schools I've taught at for... ages - well over a decade (at the latest place). I've seen hundreds of kids collect, paint, play and talk about GW stuff. Now, the club has dwindled to 2 kids. Potential new bloods come along each year now, check out GW's website when they're thinking of getting an army, and then see the prices and don't bother. Our current generation of wargamer is rapidly becoming extinct - due to the ridiculous price of plastic toy soldiers.

If you were comparing it to the Saurus, I'd agree with you. The saurus retiment is a questionable kit that needed a re-design, not a re-pack. But then again, now we're again talking about a 15 year old regiment, not a modern plastic hero sprue. And when you start comparing the model to GW plastic heroes, the technology just isn't on the same level. The Shadow walker's posing and design are dictated by the mold making process. It's the reason he's in that kind of bleh non-comittal pose no matter how you build him. The newer GW model is designed in a way that allows for a more expressive pose while still fitting onto the sprue. That's a considerable technology gap.

I should note that there are no comparable GW plastic character kits from 15 years ago.. Back then the characters were in metal because the plastic technology just wasn't there to make them look as good and dynamic and detailed as characters should. You might compare it to the earliest plastic character kits like the empire general or the space marine captain, but both of those kits are considerably more detailed, with far more options on their sprues, so still doesn't feel like a reasonable comparison.

And even those models are completely blown away by most of the modern clamshell plastic characters like the wight king or the chaos sorcerer or the sadly discontinued saurus hero.

The shadow walker just isn't a model that compares to GW heroes, not from then and not from today. So the fact that it's cheaper than they are does nothing to establish GW models as overpriced. Honestly, I do think the recent GW releases have been beyond the pale, being nearly twice what I would consider a reasonable price, but I'd argue that the shadow walker is just as over priced, being twice what I would even consider paying for it.

GW models are not overpriced, but they are expensive.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW models are not overpriced, but they are expensive.

I am curious, what do you mean by that?

thekingofkings wrote:
I could use a comparison to their LOTR/Hobbit line which is now after divorcing AoS the only product line from GW I will still buy, they are very overpriced but the detail is IMO Much better.

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Battlesmiths $30
vs
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Nori-Dori-Gloin-Dwarf-Champions-of-Erebor $40

but I also stand by my statement, if I could buy one or the other ( I play neither game, actually have no idea what the first one is) I would still buy the top one because I think it looks better and is a better value for my money

I didn't think it was possible for anyone to make those LOTR miniatures seem cheap by comparison, but somehow GW went the extra mile and did it. $30 dollars for one boring autocad foot hero plastic sprue.

Bravo

Yeah...:( The Middle Earth minis, I guess in this case especially Hobbit line, came out of the gate at an astronomical price. I'm no price complainer but this seemed like a practical joke. I felt for the store managers on Hobbit. I bought the plastic eagles for Storm of Magic since they were awesome, and sadly it was almost impossible to get discount Hobbit models on eBay so $50 more of a Pity buy. Almost splurged for the dwarf Grimhammers but no one wanted to buy and play. Can't say I blame them. I'm eager to see what specialist games does with Middle Earth hopefully by next year.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW models are not overpriced, but they are expensive.

Unless you live in Australia...