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.

 Siegfried VII wrote:
I must say that I really despise mantic models. Especially their elves are in my opinion the worst models in existence.

As for the argument about the two companies one must choose either expensive quality (GW) or cheap quantity (Mantic).

Everything else is subject to what part of the hobby one enjoys most...

I do worry about people who reduce their leisure activities solely to a bottom-line exercise...

Its economics.

I know a lot of guys that play wargames with chess pieces or paper they cut out. There is now a lego fad where lego pieces are being used to represent models.

I can't get into that but its a pretty fairly common thing I've noticed.

RoperPG wrote:

 Siegfried VII wrote:
I must say that I really despise mantic models. Especially their elves are in my opinion the worst models in existence.

As for the argument about the two companies one must choose either expensive quality (GW) or cheap quantity (Mantic).

Everything else is subject to what part of the hobby one enjoys most...

I do worry about people who reduce their leisure activities solely to a bottom-line exercise...

I worry about people who throw good money after bad "to finish their armies"

Horse>Courses.

RoperPG wrote:

I do worry about people who reduce their leisure activities solely to a bottom-line exercise...

Here's your top-line, premium priced model:

And here's your discount price model:



I wouldn't buy either of them. Each manufacturer has their stinkers.

Yea, ok, that's not really a fair comparison of what gw had to offer (esp when listed as gw's top of the line premium model). Here is a fair and unbiased comparison of each companies top of the line, most expensive, best premium sculpt:

Owning both models, gw wins big time in quality, aesthetic, etc. Now aesthetic will vary from person to person, and paint jobs can make or break some minis, but no other wargames compare to gw's latest plastic kits. I don't agree with their pricing, but that's why I don't buy everything they make.

 Ghaz wrote:

hobojebus wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
No. They're not a better deal, just like you said that you wouldn't buy GW's models "for free". You expect us to use Mantic's models because they're a better 'deal', yet you won't use GW's models if they're free, therefore making them an unbeatable 'deal'? You're contradicting yourself.

That's a strawman no where have I said I expect people to use mantic models, repeating it won't make it true.

I compared one plastic dwarf to another by price and by volume, that is separated from my personal opinion that all the new AoS stuff is ugly.

There's no contraction one is a fact the other is an opinion.

Mantic starter set is cheaper and does give you more stuff than GW's 21 dwarves for £100 pounds, that's a fact it's incontrovertible.

My not thinking the AoS stuff is worth anything in an opinion that's subjective.

And please stop trying to put words in my mouth it's a wasted effort I don't respond to strawman arguments.

No. You're the one making strawman arguments claiming Mantic's models are a 'better deal' and then go on to claim GW's models wouldn't be a 'better deal' even if they're free just because you don't like the sculpts.

That's not a strawman argument, a strawman is when you claim someone said something they did not then argue against that instead of what they actually said.

You did that I did not.

It's now painfully clear you don't have a valid counter argument or really a sound grasp on the basic difference between a fact and an opinion so I'm going to stop this pointless dialogue.

Ghaz wrote:And here's your discount price model:

I wouldn't buy either of them. Each manufacturer has their stinkers.

I wouldn't either. But I'll be more willing to forgive the one with the more modest price tag, than the one from the company that boasts about making "the best toy soldiers in the world" then charges you a ridiculous premium price for them regardless if they're that good or not.

Regarding previous comments in this thread, I heavily disagree about the whole Mantic product line being gak. As you say, every manufacturer has their stinkers. Mantic's line overall is hit-and-miss. They have some pretty decent models for an affordable price (less affordable since their recent price rise though), a bunch of 'meh' models, and also some gakky ones. They have shown serious issues at turning promising concept art into proper models. Still it's mostly a matter of subjective taste. I've seen their elves over a table with a decent paintjob, and they're not half as bad as most people in the internet will tell you. They have quite a peculiar aesthetic that departs from more canonical elves and they're obviously not for everyone (i.e. I don't want them).

455_PWR wrote:Yea, ok, that's not really a fair comparison of what gw had to offer (esp when listed as gw's top of the line premium model). Here is a fair and unbiased comparison of each companies top of the line, most expensive, best premium sculpt.

Owning both models, gw wins big time in quality, aesthetic, etc. Now aesthetic will vary from person to person, and paint jobs can make or break some minis, but no other wargames compare to gw's latest plastic kits. I don't agree with their pricing, but that's why I don't buy everything they make.

You'd be surprised of what you can find out there if you pay enough attention. Also aesthetics depend a lot on personal tastes. I truly loathe the new Archaon model. It's an oversized, overbloated mess that doesn't even deserve to lick the boots of his previous, decade-old, metal model. I concede it's quite neat from a technical point of view (and probably the pinnacle of plastic tech nowadays) but I don't like the design nor the execution. Then again I'm not really into models that big. The Mantic one looks pretty poor and I wouldn't buy it even at 90% discount. I'm pretty happy with the resin "drake" I got from Reaper, it provides my dark elf army with a dragon option when needed... and it fits into my shelf too!

Need I remind you of what you posted? Obviously I do...

hobojebus wrote:21 naked dwarves £100, mantic dwarf starter 72 models £50.

3x the models half the price.

Now like or dislike the models the difference in value is undeniable.

That's what's killing GW, greed.

hobojebus wrote:I wouldn't buy the soulless cad models AoS has released so far for free they are seriously bad.

I'm a gamer I use the models as wound counters when they are not on a board they sit in a box not in a display case.

So gw prices are beyond a joke offering no value for money where mantics by comparison fantastic.

There is a word for a person who claims to have certain moral principles or beliefs but behaves in a way that shows they are not sincere. You seem to claim that the less expensive Mantic models are a 'better value' but if GW's models were free then they wouldn't be a 'better value'. You can't keep your own position straight. First its use Mantic's models because they're the 'better value' and then its don't use the GW models even if they were the 'better value'.

It's the cost of books more than the cost of figures.

Yup, that's what I was getting at with aesthetics, some people like it while others won't.

I actually thought the same about the new archaon model. I decided to give it a chance (thinking that my dislike may be in part due to the paint schemes). I assembled it and have to say it is one of the nicest, coolest, largest models in my collection. His angles make him look bloated or whatever in gw's pics, but his model is quite muscular, slim, and dynamic. I firmly believe the new stormcast dragon's issues are the same as well, and the model will be much better in person.

I have not painted my new archaon yet, but everyone who has entered my game room has commented on how freakishly awesome his model is regardless (then they gasp when they hear the price lol, good thing I got him on ebay at discount with another $20 off ebay coupon ). He is in a cabinet by every kingdom death model made, every WWX model, many 40k models, mantic models, dust models, CBT models, etc. They all pick his model over the others (although the kingdom death models get the "what the... omg" reaction, and wwx models get the "cool, what game is this!" reaction).

So anyway, I think to summarize the last many posts so we can all get back on topic:

1. Some/you hate gw's aesthetics and think they are overpriced
2. some would rather buy cheaper minis to use even if not up tot the same quality (gamer, not collector)
3. Others like gw's aesthetics
4. Others are willing to spend more to use high quality minis they like, even if they are ridiculously priced
5. Facts are GW's plastics are near the best plastics on the market for QUALITY, maybe not each person's aesthetics

 455_PWR wrote:
If you are basing your opinions off gw's corporate health, well, their profits and losses are not posted by game. There is no way to decipher this. Any posts about that or global sales is... opinion. No one had global facts. The only varifiable facts we can get are our flgs sales.

No varifiable facts = no proof = not true = rumors = conjecture = personal bias

As always when this comes up, I'd like to point out this post from Larry Vela of BoLS:

bigred wrote:
What we've heard from every retailer out there was a strong robust year up until AoS hit on July 4th weekend - followed by the worst 12-week summer for GW sales they had ever seen. (One retailers said is was the worst summer of GW sales in 17 years!), followed by a leveling off and slow regrowth with the arrival of Tau. Still, not back up up to the pre AoS levels.

Several retailers told us they would never treat GW the same after that summer and are strongly diversifying product lines away from them.

[...]

I'm certain GW has felt the pain of AoS behind the scenes, regardless of the public face they are putting out. Not one retailer talked about it in positive terms with us.

It's not a full breakdown of GW's earnings by system, but BoLS has a pretty wide network of games stores that they talk to, and I believe they've at least got some connection to people in the know. Pretty much every publicly-available indicator shows AoS bombed on release. I've heard quite a few people say it's picking up, and maybe that's true (it's certainly true in my area, at least in gameplay if not sales), but that's starting from what very much seems to be a monumentally low floor.

auticus wrote:
There is now a lego fad where lego pieces are being used to represent models.

Lego minifigs are not cheap at roughly $3 each.

If I had to buy an army, Lego would not be my starting point.

 455_PWR wrote:
So anyway, I think to summarize the last many posts so we can all get back on topic:

1. Some/you hate gw's aesthetics and think they are overpriced
2. some would rather buy cheaper minis to use even if not up tot the same quality (gamer, not collector)
3. Others like gw's aesthetics
4. Others are willing to spend more to use high quality minis they like, even if they are ridiculously priced
5. Facts are GW's plastics are near the best plastics on the market for QUALITY, maybe not each person's aesthetics

First of all, I'm glad you're enjoying your new Archaon model. No sarcasm here.

I don't hate GW's aesthetics. It's just that GW's general aesthetic sense, in recent years, simply does not appeal to me in the slightest. Their models keep getting more and more ornate, many times overloaded with tons of details that serve no purpose other than to brag about how advanced their plastic technology is. At the same time their models keep getting bigger and bigger, I could barely stomach their past scale creeps (there was a pretty clear one around 2004), but the current trend has just gone IMO too far.

I also have an issue with the mentality that cheaper always means lower quality and more expensive means higher quality. This is actually what they (blindly) seem to believe at GW, and what they want everyone else to believe. Well, it's not true. Look around the market and here and there you will find models that rival GW's quality for a fraction of the price. The problem is that many people seem to know just Mantic and only Mantic as "The Alternative", hence every other manufacturer that is not GW asks for lower prices because their product is crap.

 Korinov wrote:
I don't hate GW's aesthetics. It's just that GW's general aesthetic sense, in recent years, simply does not appeal to me in the slightest. Their models keep getting more and more ornate, many times overloaded with tons of details that serve no purpose other than to brag about how advanced their plastic technology is. At the same time their models keep getting bigger and bigger, I could barely stomach their past scale creeps (there was a pretty clear one around 2004), but the current trend has just gone IMO too far.

I don't know about you guys, but I dropped $100s on Kingdom Death : Monster specifically for the monsters, which are huge and ornate and freakin' awesome.

If you guys wanna play small, fine. But you don't speak for me, and tiny, crappy, chintzy, gakky stuff like Mantic doesn't speak to me at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 455_PWR wrote:
Owning both models, gw wins big time in quality, aesthetic, etc. .

Wait, stop. You paid real hard-earned money on that lump of gak from Mantic? On purpose, not scammed? Dude, WTF?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

auticus wrote:
There is now a lego fad where lego pieces are being used to represent models.

Lego minifigs are not cheap at roughly $3 each.

If I had to buy an army, Lego would not be my starting point.

No no not minifigs. Legos. Like... the square pieces are a model. They have bags full of them they dump out and then put on a flat rectangle (moving tray). They assign colors for units. So the red unit might be a unit of swordmasters, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Korinov wrote:

 455_PWR wrote:
So anyway, I think to summarize the last many posts so we can all get back on topic:

1. Some/you hate gw's aesthetics and think they are overpriced
2. some would rather buy cheaper minis to use even if not up tot the same quality (gamer, not collector)
3. Others like gw's aesthetics
4. Others are willing to spend more to use high quality minis they like, even if they are ridiculously priced
5. Facts are GW's plastics are near the best plastics on the market for QUALITY, maybe not each person's aesthetics

First of all, I'm glad you're enjoying your new Archaon model. No sarcasm here.

I don't hate GW's aesthetics. It's just that GW's general aesthetic sense, in recent years, simply does not appeal to me in the slightest. Their models keep getting more and more ornate, many times overloaded with tons of details that serve no purpose other than to brag about how advanced their plastic technology is. At the same time their models keep getting bigger and bigger, I could barely stomach their past scale creeps (there was a pretty clear one around 2004), but the current trend has just gone IMO too far.

I also have an issue with the mentality that cheaper always means lower quality and more expensive means higher quality. This is actually what they (blindly) seem to believe at GW, and what they want everyone else to believe. Well, it's not true. Look around the market and here and there you will find models that rival GW's quality for a fraction of the price. The problem is that many people seem to know just Mantic and only Mantic as "The Alternative", hence every other manufacturer that is not GW asks for lower prices because their product is crap.

If I found a cheaper alternative that I actually liked visually, you can bet I"d buy those models. To date, that has not happened. I've got some mantic models. My chaos dwarf army has a few of their heroes. I also play frostgrave and the undead are from mantic.

You get what you pay for. I don't think mantic looks like cheap **** because they are cheap. I think that they look like cheap **** because largely most of the models to me look like cheap ****.

auticus wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

auticus wrote:
There is now a lego fad where lego pieces are being used to represent models.

Lego minifigs are not cheap at roughly $3 each.

If I had to buy an army, Lego would not be my starting point.

No no not minifigs. Legos. Like... the square pieces are a model. They have bags full of them they dump out and then put on a flat rectangle (moving tray). They assign colors for units. So the red unit might be a unit of swordmasters, etc.

Oh, I completely misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying. Though I don't quite understand why Lego when that sort of army representation works just as well for the classic wooden blocks used for many Ancients games.

Mantic reminds me of early GW

 455_PWR wrote:

3. Others like gw's aesthetics
4. Others are willing to spend more to use high quality minis they like, even if they are ridiculously priced
5. Facts are GW's plastics are near the best plastics on the market for QUALITY, maybe not each person's aesthetics

Definitely these describe me. I like what I like. I most certainly know that cheaper miniatures exist. My 28mm Napoleonics from Perry Miniatures are staring me in the face, but the historicals market also has a lot more saturation and choice due to the covering of, well, history where a 28mm French Grenadier is going to look pretty comparable (relatively) to another company's 28mm French Grenadier, thus more direct competition. Show me, anti-GW people, where I can get non-GW Nurgle Daemons that fit the AoS aesthetic and are not boutique and can be gotten at a regular hobby shop off the shelf? Oh yeah. . .

Paint jobs for webstore use also don't help models (of any company) sometimes, dear lord I remember one of the newer Bilbo models looked atrocious and there were parts that were unpainted in the 360 degree frames.

auticus wrote:
Its economics.

I know a lot of guys that play wargames with chess pieces or paper they cut out. There is now a lego fad where lego pieces are being used to represent models.

I can't get into that but its a pretty fairly common thing I've noticed.

If it's single lego blocks, that might be more economical.
If it's lego figures, you can afford to buy the most expensive GW stuff and hit the Cheesecake Factory with the savings


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

auticus wrote:
There is now a lego fad where lego pieces are being used to represent models.

Lego minifigs are not cheap at roughly $3 each.

If I had to buy an army, Lego would not be my starting point.

And they're only that cheap if you want random if I understand right.
If you wanted a regiment of like models such as pirates in this unit - you're gonna pay a lot more.

I don't think that they bought them new I think that they had a ton already and that dude just bagged them up and use them for wargaming now so they don't have to buy models.

OK, got it. The funny thing is I totally love the concept of plastic block infantry. I'd just want it with sculpted plastic blocks that were molded to look like dozens of ranked infantry to support a 1:1 figure:ground scale - something that AOS and other 28mm games will never approach.

Did those with historicals. Those are pretty awesome tables but damn if they aren't also a ton of work.