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.

 Marmatag wrote:

And you're kidding yourselves if companies don't kowtow to their vocal minority. Consider Blizzard and Overwatch, with the Tracer over-the-shoulder pose.

Quelle horreur! How can we ever survive this! Overwatch is ruined, man!

 Marmatag wrote:
Maybe this explains why we haven't seen a significant effort to develop slaanesh lines.

Doubtful. The design aesthetics important to Slaanesh are dramatically different to those important to Sisters of Battle.

If you can't tell the difference between a daemonette and a sister of battle, your opinion is utterly worthless when it comes to discussing art.

 Crimson wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

And you're kidding yourselves if companies don't kowtow to their vocal minority. Consider Blizzard and Overwatch, with the Tracer over-the-shoulder pose.

Quelle horreur! How can we ever survive this! Overwatch is ruined, man!

Except that is not at all what i'm saying

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Fast pointy ear wrote:
Firstly, there are marines that are very clearly male by their armour.
The Sanguinary Guard, Astorath, the Sanguinor and all the other Blood Angel nipple armour models are all examples of a Gothic style armour meant to accentuate and celebrate the male human form.

I agree, but they are the exceptions, not the norm.

To which the solution is, IMO, GW pulling the finger out and updating their range with more female human soldiers(and other things), not changing the very distinctive aesthetic of an existing faction. Big ol' grizzled Brienne of Tarth-proportioned female Ministorum Preacher. A female Commissar that doesn't have Inexplicable Cleavage. A new Guard box with a relatively sober uniform style and at least 1/3 female models. Some HUEG Cawl-esque inhuman Mechanicus monstrosity that just happens to have been a human female before becoming 97% bionic. Etc etc. There's huge scope for making 40K a more diverse, more representative(of its own background as well as of the fanbase) model range without having to make one single solitary change to the existing background or factional aesthetics, and given I rather like the existing background and factional aesthetics I'd much rather they did that.

 BBAP wrote:
Conclusion: Companies kowtow to their vocal minorities when it pays them to do so, and only to the extent that it pays them to do so.

The problem is, they don't. Go ahead and ask Marvel how profitable kowtowing has been for them. Ask Wizards of the Coast where kowtowing has gotten them. Ask Disney about the success of their new Star Wars film.

The problem is that decisions in predominantly nerd industries are not made based on pure profit-driven goals. The loyalty of the fans has, generally, softened the blows of each poor decision as loyal fans take a little longer to give up things that have gone bad (see also: GW fans from 5 years ago). This means that bad decisions which are relatively small can mask their effects long enough for those in charge to double down on them. By the time people realize the ideological rot, too much damage has been done and cannot be undone.

Games Workshop is actually in a fairly good position because it is a small, singular company that is not based in the US and has low visibility outside of miniature gaming - which, thus far, has largely escaped the hysteria. But all it is going to take is one popular miniatures company loudly proclaiming "We're changing things for these ideological reasons" and all hell will break loose.

 Melissia wrote:

If you can't tell the difference between a daemonette and a sister of battle, your opinion is utterly worthless when it comes to discussing art.

Oh my goodness. I suppose this is what i get for clicking "show post" in the first place. Peace

That post seems to have a baseline assertion that the only reason any company creates characters that aren't a genetic scruffy white guy are to kowtow to "radical vocal minorities", which as an assumption in this argument is completely and utterly baseless.

Given this is my thread do you think we could continue to discuss plastic sisters of battle without mentioning the words 'Feminism' 'Feminist' 'SJW', or 'Boob Plate.'

I'd rather we didn't get locked with a note from the mods saying that Sisters of Battle have now been classified with American politics as a toxic topic.

Sure, but I'm not exactly sure what that leaves us to discuss. We do not yet have additional information other than "GW intends to work on them in order to get them done by late 2019".

Melissa, with regards to those pictures - to be fair, I think most of the different between the Canoness and nu-Celestine has to do with the way GW's style and production process have evolved more generally. The former was produced specifically to fit with a metal range sculpted in 2nd Ed where the proportions were often comical even by the standards of "heroic scale", the latter is essentially the "ideal" execution of the underlying concept.

I do agree though that nu-Celestine & the Gemini are great, and if they do use that template I'll be a happy chappie.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Melissa, with regards to those pictures - to be fair, I think most of the different between the Canoness and nu-Celestine has to do with the way GW's style and production process have evolved more generally. The former was produced specifically to fit with a metal range sculpted in 2nd Ed where the proportions were often comical even by the standards of "heroic scale", the latter is essentially the "ideal" execution of the underlying concept.

You're substantially correct, but really, I think that's the point I was trying to make-- if GW produces something closer to the Celestine miniature as opposed to Veridyan or the 2nd/3rd edition Canoness miniatures, very few people will complain.

As such:

 Yodhrin wrote:
I do agree though that nu-Celestine & the Gemini are great, and if they do use that template I'll be a happy chappie.

I entirely agree.

We could discuss what inevitable new plastic unit we'll get so we have to go out and buy the new plastic kit?

My best guess is dedicated close combat power armoured sisters, maybe close combat Seraphim?

 Marmatag wrote:
If that's the case you've had plastic sisters of battle for years, haven't you?

Remember this conversation was started by someone who said that sisters of battle should not have boob plate.

If you take a Sister of Battle, redesign the armor to remove the boobplate, you don't get a space marine.
If you take a Space Marine and add a boobplate on it, you don't get a Sister of Battle either.
Believe it or not, they are quite different.

Also at the plus-size comment. You are trying to hard, edgy boy .

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
100% Wrong. The Eccesiarch is *exactly* the same as Chaos, and Repentia are merely Imperial Daemonettes for all intents and purposes.

This is so obviously and completely wrong that I assume you are joking, but I'm still not completely convinced…

Asmodios wrote:
I never get the arguments on here for female models.

You don't get that different people have different opinions? It's not that surprising, come on!

 Melissia wrote:
I never said they didn't. I said it was toned down from previous miniatures.
Compare:

The 3e canoness is the exception rather than the rule. Celestine and gemini look like the rest of the range.

And Veridyan only representative of John Blanche. One of these days they'll release a Blanche-marine with leopardskin shoulderpads and a skull codpiece. And heels.

A.T. wrote:
One of these days they'll release a Blanche-marine with leopardskin shoulderpads and a skull codpiece. And heels.

I really hope so!

 BBAP wrote:
The people you've been arguing with are not really feminists; they are cancer.

I am sorry, but they are demonstrably not cancer . They are human beings, not a bunch of cells inside an organism that have begun to multiply uncontrollably. It's science, bitch!

 Yodhrin wrote:
without having to make one single solitary change to the existing background or factional aesthetics

Did I ask for this in this thread? Or someone else? Or is it just some general observation not aimed at anyone in particular?

 Crimson wrote:
Quelle horreur! How can we ever survive this! Overwatch is ruined, man!

It's like Star Wars! Star Wars is now dead as a franchise, noone will ever make a Star Wars movie ever again, everyone hates Star Wars!
Some people seriously need to stop letting politics and hatred cloud their judgment .

A.T. wrote:


And Veridyan only representative of John Blanche. One of these days they'll release a Blanche-marine with leopardskin shoulderpads and a skull codpiece. And heels.

That sounds dumb. I'll take 5.

 Melissia wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Melissa, with regards to those pictures - to be fair, I think most of the different between the Canoness and nu-Celestine has to do with the way GW's style and production process have evolved more generally. The former was produced specifically to fit with a metal range sculpted in 2nd Ed where the proportions were often comical even by the standards of "heroic scale", the latter is essentially the "ideal" execution of the underlying concept.

You're substantially correct, but really, I think that's the point I was trying to make-- if GW produces something closer to the Celestine miniature as opposed to Veridyan or the 2nd/3rd edition Canoness miniatures, very few people will complain.

This is me. Right here. Subtle boob-plate that isn't a pastiche of itself and doesn't stab my thumbs when I pick up the model. That's what I want. Not "no boob plate". Good boob-plate.

 Marmatag wrote:
I specifically said your mileage may vary. If i was arguing what you're suggesting i am, then i wouldn't have said that, right?

YMMV is where you started. Then you made an allegory regarding tigers in India, an allegory crafted to suggest your opinion had inherent validity due to the fact you live somewhere where corner-case nutjobs abound.

Essentially you're using the old "lived experience" canard. "My lived experience suggests [x], hence I get to be right about [x] in defiance of all sense and logic." It doesn't work for corner-case "feminist" nutjobs and it's not going to work for you, either.

Like I said before, not all feminists. Not sure why that would amuse you so much, but since it did, here it is again. Have fun.

Anyway, if you want to shoot a PM to me explaining how horrible i am

I don't think you're horrible. I can disagree with you without thinking you're a villain.

 Sqorgar wrote:
The problem is that decisions in predominantly nerd industries are not made based on pure profit-driven goals.

Discussions in any industry are based on profitability, whether they cater to nerds or not - particularly if the participating companies have shareholders to pay. No company is going to release anything that antagonises a potential consumer demographic unless they're confident they can profit without said demographic's dollah, because employees who do such things tend to get horsed out the door at the next AGM.

Marvel is dying because superhero comics suck balls, and have done ever since they started taking themselves way too seriously. Disney's latest Star Wars film is failing because it is ass. Mass Effect Andromeda was a glitch-tastic horror show of a game that would've been horrendous even without the maladroit social conscience crap they filled the plot with. "Pandering to SJWs" is not the only reason things fail.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
They are human beings, not a bunch of cells inside an organism that have begun to multiply uncontrollably.

To be fair, that is exactly how human beings originate too!

I disagree, Crimson. Quite the opposite, human beings originate from cells who begin to multiply in a very controlled way. That's why cloning is hard, especially cloning just some organs.

Can a Moderator lock this thread please? Thanks.

 Crimson wrote:

A.T. wrote:
One of these days they'll release a Blanche-marine with leopardskin shoulderpads and a skull codpiece. And heels.

I really hope so!

Hell yeah! when can I order them and what are the rules? Maybe d6 s4 attacks for the power heels (with rend) and -1 to hit due to the leopard print.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 BBAP wrote:
The people you've been arguing with are not really feminists; they are cancer.

I am sorry, but they are demonstrably not cancer . They are human beings, not a bunch of cells inside an organism that have begun to multiply uncontrollably. It's science, bitch!

Allow me to rephrase:

"The people you're dealing with are thwarted, unaccomplished extremist zealots who have been taught by consumerist culture to believe that their opinions and desires are sacred. Armed with this misconception, they have swaddled themselves in an ideology which they do not understand and cannot articulate; this they use as an excuse to rant at anything which displeases them, an act which serves as a kind of catharsis for their frustration at the knowledge that they are not as special as they've been lead to believe. Attempting to reason with them is pointless. Speaking allegorically, I would liken them to cancer, for like cancer, they ruin whatever they embed themselves into with their malignant demands for sustenance."

... is that better?

Guys, if we want to know what GW currently thinks females in power armor should look like, I don't think we need to go any further than the Sisters of Silence.



Looks like boob plate to me. So, we done?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Given this is my thread do you think we could continue to discuss plastic sisters of battle without mentioning the words 'Feminism' 'Feminist' 'SJW', or 'Boob Plate.'

Would I like to? Yes.

Do I think we can? Not so much.

 BBAP wrote:

Discussions in any industry are based on profitability, whether they cater to nerds or not - particularly if the participating companies have shareholders to pay. No company is going to release anything that antagonises a potential consumer demographic unless they're confident they can profit without said demographic's dollah, because employees who do such things tend to get horsed out the door at the next AGM.

That's the problem though, isn't it? In these other industries, on the cusp of becoming mainstream, they think that appealing to their typical audience (white, middle aged men) is holding them back from having a larger audience. They think they can abandon their current audience because the grass on the other side seems so, so green. In many cases, they think that their current audience should and will come with them (after all, only neckbeards don't want more women in gaming, right?). Having set up the premise that people who agree are good fans and people who disagree are neckbeards, when the audience doesn't follow, the only conclusion they have allowed themselves to arrive at is that they must be neckbeards, or alt-right, or nazis, or misogynists, or whatever.

Marvel is dying because superhero comics suck balls, and have done ever since they started taking themselves way too seriously. Disney's latest Star Wars film is failing because it is ass. Mass Effect Andromeda was a glitch-tastic horror show of a game that would've been horrendous even without the maladroit social conscience crap they filled the plot with. "Pandering to SJWs" is not the only reason things fail.

Marvel is dying due to pandering, from the type of writers they hired to the type of books they tried to push to the decisions they made with franchise characters. I mean, Marvel drank the Kool-Aid, big time, and you can see it in everything they say and do. I say this as someone with decades of Iron Man comics, and Riri Williams is just about the worst thing I have ever seen - Bendis is a hack.

With Mass Effect, the creators of it were very vocally pushing their ideology on Twitter (one writer suggested we "kill all white men") and declared multiple times that it was underpinning their design for the game. It's true that the game was incompetently made, but that's what happens when you hire activists instead of game developers. Even without the glitches, the political nature of the game (one character literally gives you an unprompted monologue on transgenderism) would've made the game impossible to sit through.

Disney hasn't made a decent Star Wars product yet (maybe Rebels) and I don't think they can make one. Having not seen the new movie, I agree that it probably didn't suck just because of ideology - but it didn't help.

"Marvel is dying"

Marvel's net income from continuing operations has doubled over the past five years, and their market share and subscription numbers are up. All this endless pc whining about "ermagerd ess jay dubyooz oh nooooez!" is nothing more than pointless self-serving nonsense, and wholly without merit. And furthermore has nothing at all to do with Sisters of Battle.

 Sqorgar wrote:
Marvel is dying

Marvel is
* looks at the financial result of Black Panther, watch the trailers for the various Marvel movies to come *
dying. Sure. Why not?
In other news, I have the regret of informing you that Disney is totally dying. Because of Star Wars and Marvel! Soon Mickey Mouse will come back into the public domain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BBAP wrote:
... is that better?

It was. Until you went back to the cancer analogy .

You may have noticed that most GW models show exaggerated features in some way.
Giant shoulder pads, massive horns, huge swords and guns and so on. Everything that is supposed to be visible and distinctive is scaled up.
That is a necessity, because otherwise you would not notice these features on a tiny model from a distance.

The typical SoB features are the same. To make them distinctive models, more than just a female head is needed.
The better the quality of the model itself, the more subtle they can be, but at some point the model just looks boring.

"Boring" is a matter of taste. For example, I find Chaos Marine models to be almost universally boring, no matter how highly detailed they are.

As much as I like and love this design and drawing, I can't but find it... offf. Like something is missing. I know, of course, if they adopt this, I will end up getting used to it, but... meh. I don't think its necessary.

[spoiler]