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.

 Graphite wrote:
Keep in mind that until about 4 or 5 years ago, we didn't really have "Monopose plastics". All the good, dynamic, well composed plastic miniatures recently? Monopose.

And people have complained like FURY. "These suck, how am I meant to make each of My Doodz look different"

Multipart plastics are NOT dynamic, unless you as the modeller are really good at posing. Every Ork Boy or Cadian is fundamentally identical, except for changing the angle of the limbs and torso by a couple of degrees.

And that's fine! It's good for rank and file.

But if you want models with character, a sense of movement and dynamism, GW's plastic miniatures only just caught up with what they used to do in metal. And yes, now that they're working with a light material that allows very thin parts and they've cracked chopping up the CAD files in such a way that you can get recessed details and undercuts that the old rubber moulds allowed metals to do, lots of then are utterly beautiful. And they can be a right pain to glue together in order to achieve that.

But the idea that "Old models sucked, newer ones are better 'cos they're newer" is just flat out wrong.

Multipart plastic has nothing to do with the comedic style that GW is still very much obsessed with. I would describe it as heroicly heroic scale.

The old metals were a lot of things, beautiful miniatures in many cases, but dynamic? You're towing a company line so that people will accept mediocre monopose plastic kits as the new normal. Which still can't match the old metals in detail and now they are charging you even more for monpose plastic. Bravo to GW, I guess.

I'm not necessarily meaning dynamic in the sense of "leaping through the air, one toe artfully attached to a Combat Rock (tm)"

I mean dynamic as in the flow of the miniature and the way the musculature etc. can act in semi-realistic ways.

Look at these:



Jumping about? No. Restricted to almost 2d? Yup. Looks like a human (well, space elf) could actually bend that way, with limbs that actually work? Hell yes.

And I'm not toeing any GW line. I'm saying that old metal miniatures were awesome, and if the only way we can get that level of awesome back is plastic miniatures which are really fiddly to put together I guess that's just the way it goes. I'd dispute that new plastic can't match old metal for detail. But I'm absolutely certain it doesn't match it for variety.

Variety? Bro two of those are repeats of the same sculpt.
And all their guns are bent.
And the hair doesn't look like hair.

GW's current "dynamic" means "jumping off a tactical rock of varying size while somersaulting", so to me it feels forced more times than not, plust it usually makes for some very unbalanced and prone to breaking minis.

Take Lelith, by way of example:



The new one is jumping... and that's mostly it. The old one is just touching the ground after seemingly doing some kind of pirouetting slash with both knives, and you can see it from the way her toes are placed on the "ground" to how their arms are finishing the move and the way the knives are positioned... you can see it all on her body language. To me, it feels much more "dynamic" than the new one, even though she's with both feet on the "ground" and not jumping around willy nilly (it would be as effective without the piece of statuary she's on top of, and it's actually a pretty solid piece of mini, not very prone to breakage). I like the old one much, much more than the new one, that to me feels directionless. It seems it's aping the old model while trying to make her "dynamic", and IMHO, it fails.

But of course, to me a dynamic model is one that tells me a story by how it's modelled.

And how many variations of each monopose character model/unit do you get now? 5?

Meanwhile, I have this guy in my collection

http://www.miniatures-workshop.com/lostminiswiki/index.php?title=Image:Citadel-LE21-02.jpg

Yes, that's right, it's a citadel dwarf buckling up his trousers after going to the loo.

Is there any sensible reason for this to exist?

No.

Am I glad it does, and does it add to the variety of citadel miniatures?

Yes.

gak, the old metal minis of Archaon and Belakor are incredible minis, still very much among my favorites, and Archaon particularly is a really big hunk of metal.

Comparatively, the new "centerpiece" Archaon leaves me very, very cold, even before any "how the feth do I transport this gak" considerations.

Kind of similarly... the new Belakor is pretty, but it's simply too big, unwieldy and prone to break for me to take it seriously. And the old one is still impressively good. And I already have it, so the price is right

Then again, the "make it bigger, no, I said BIGGER" trend that GW is in is simply something I'm not at all fond of. I have Epic and Warmaster for that gak.

Again I couldn't agree more, so glad I got Archaon and Belakor right before they turned them into finecrap.

 Albertorius wrote:
gak, the old metal minis of Archaon and Belakor are incredible minis, still very much among my favorites, and Archaon particularly is a really big hunk of metal.

Comparatively, the new "centerpiece" Archaon leaves me very, very cold, even before any "how the feth do I transport this gak" considerations.

Kind of similarly... the new Belakor is pretty, but it's simply too big, unwieldy and prone to break for me to take it seriously. And the old one is still impressively good. And I already have it, so the price is right

Then again, the "make it bigger, no, I said BIGGER" trend that GW is in is simply something I'm not at all fond of. I have Epic and Warmaster for that gak.

I had Belakor as a Demon Prince in my World Eaters Army; because I throught that he looks cooler than the CSM DP at that Time..

RazorEdge wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
gak, the old metal minis of Archaon and Belakor are incredible minis, still very much among my favorites, and Archaon particularly is a really big hunk of metal.

Comparatively, the new "centerpiece" Archaon leaves me very, very cold, even before any "how the feth do I transport this gak" considerations.

Kind of similarly... the new Belakor is pretty, but it's simply too big, unwieldy and prone to break for me to take it seriously. And the old one is still impressively good. And I already have it, so the price is right

Then again, the "make it bigger, no, I said BIGGER" trend that GW is in is simply something I'm not at all fond of. I have Epic and Warmaster for that gak.

I had Belakor as a Demon Prince in my World Eaters Army; because I throught that he looks cooler than the CSM DP at that Time..

Which reminds me...

Old metal CSM DP (kind of crap image, didn't find one better painted with a quick search):



New(er) plastic CSM DP:



I mean, the new one was multipart and monopose, which made it much more versatile, but assembled as the "official" CSM DP? The metal one is a much better miniature.

It's basically the same model but better sculpted and more detailed

Anyone who thinks the Green Knight sculpt is bad and not one of the best sculpts GW has ever produced is lying or a fool.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


Metal Har Ganeth executioners > plastic executioners.

Same with black guard of naggarond.

Most of the old metal elite regiments are way better than their current plastic versions: Greatswords, Eternal Guard, IronBreakers, Chaos Knights, Stormvermin.....

Well, yeah. Exactly. The metal one is better sculpted and has more detail.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
It's basically the same model but better sculpted and more detailed

The plastic one? hm... no? It doesn't even have the same LEGS, FFS.

If you mean the metal one, then yes, absolutely. Save for the changed stuff


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Anyone who thinks the Green Knight sculpt is bad and not one of the best sculpts GW has ever produced is lying or a fool.

So beautiful. And the way the knight's body show you he's raising the shield while preparing the sword for a riposte? That is dynamic, to me.

 Graphite wrote:
Well, yeah. Exactly. The metal one is better sculpted and has more detail.

Do you have eyes.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Graphite wrote:
Well, yeah. Exactly. The metal one is better sculpted and has more detail.

Do you have eyes.

Seems to!

Do you realize that about 80-90% of the plastic daemon prince are smooth surfaces with almost no detail, right? I mean, it's right there on the pic.

Whereas most of the old metal is creased and pocked and creased with detail. Plus, the new model suffers in comparison because it's multipart and meant to be used for both 40k and WFB (plus, being multipart, it has to make concessions), so the parts lean on the more generic side of sculpting instead of on being an enlarged and en-demoned CSM, meaning it just have a couple of token parts that kinda remind of a power armor...

As I said, the pic is bad, but maybe... let's see this one:

 Albertorius wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Graphite wrote:
Well, yeah. Exactly. The metal one is better sculpted and has more detail.

Do you have eyes.

Do you realize that about 80-90% of the plastic daemon prince are smooth surfaces with almost no detail, right? I mean, it's right there on the pic.

Whereas most of the old metal is creased and pocked and creased with detail. Plus, the new model suffers in comparison because it's multipart and meant to be used for both 40k and WFB (plus, being multipart, it has to make concessions), so the parts lean on the more generic side of sculpting instead of on being an enlarged and en-demoned CSM, meaning it just have a couple of toke parts that kinda remind of a power armor...

As I said, the pic is bad, but maybe... let's see this one:

I see.

Hm... let me save it on dakka and try again then ^^

This might genuinely be the first time I've seen anyone argue that the plastic Prince is "better sculpted" than the metal one.

There's a nut for every bolt, I guess.

Let's see now:





I've had both in hand, and the plastic one is much better for versatility and conversion potential, but it's a step down compared with the metal CSM DP as a mini.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
This might genuinely be the first time I've seen anyone argue that the plastic Prince is "better sculpted" than the metal one.

There's a nut for every bolt, I guess.

At least i don't need to use a bloody angle grinder, a soldering iron, a drill and thirty layers of paint to get it to look decent-ish and stay in one place.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
This might genuinely be the first time I've seen anyone argue that the plastic Prince is "better sculpted" than the metal one.

There's a nut for every bolt, I guess.

At least i don't need to use a bloody angle grinder, a soldering iron, a drill and thirty layers of paint to get it to look decent-ish and stay in one place.

Plastic is nice that way, that's for sure. Doesn't really have much to do with the quality of the sculpt, though.

As to HMV's comment... heh, next thing you know, someone will say the plastic minotaurs are good minis

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Variety? Bro two of those are repeats of the same sculpt.
And all their guns are bent.
And the hair doesn't look like hair.

It looks more like hair than the current ones, which look more like snakes.

Also there were 4 banshee sculpts + a banshee exarch, not great but also not a hell of a lot worse than many current GW kits, and this was back in 2nd edition when small armies were the norm.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Variety? Bro two of those are repeats of the same sculpt.
And all their guns are bent.
And the hair doesn't look like hair.

It looks more like hair than the current ones, which look more like snakes.

Also there were 4 banshee sculpts + a banshee exarch, not great but also not a hell of a lot worse than many current GW kits, and this was back in 2nd edition when small armies were the norm.

So i suppose snakes looks better than what looks like the end of a really low-quality mop that someone attacked with a machete to make it as rectangular as possible?

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
This might genuinely be the first time I've seen anyone argue that the plastic Prince is "better sculpted" than the metal one.

There's a nut for every bolt, I guess.

At least i don't need to use a bloody angle grinder, a soldering iron, a drill and thirty layers of paint to get it to look decent-ish and stay in one place.

I'm starting to think you're arguing just for the sake of arguing, everyone knows metal was hard to work with, but it made for nice looking models, that's the point.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
This might genuinely be the first time I've seen anyone argue that the plastic Prince is "better sculpted" than the metal one.

There's a nut for every bolt, I guess.

At least i don't need to use a bloody angle grinder, a soldering iron, a drill and thirty layers of paint to get it to look decent-ish and stay in one place.

I'm starting to think you're arguing just for the sake of arguing, everyone knows metal was hard to work with, but it made for nice looking models, that's the point.

It really didn't. With maybe a few exceptions.

There's a lot of lovely metal models. Same as there's a lot of lovely plastic models.

It ultimately comes down to the quality of the sculptor and how well they know the medium they're sculpting for.

Metal or plastic, doesn't much matter.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Variety? Bro two of those are repeats of the same sculpt.
And all their guns are bent.
And the hair doesn't look like hair.

It looks more like hair than the current ones, which look more like snakes.

Also there were 4 banshee sculpts + a banshee exarch, not great but also not a hell of a lot worse than many current GW kits, and this was back in 2nd edition when small armies were the norm.

So i suppose snakes looks better than what looks like the end of a really low-quality mop that someone attacked with a machete to make it as rectangular as possible?

Maybe you don't like the shape, but hair has way more detail and definition than 99% of the hair on plastic models now, including the current banshees where it looks more like ribbons.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Graphite wrote:
Well, yeah. Exactly. The metal one is better sculpted and has more detail.

Do you have eyes.

I mean, at this point I just have to go with "you and I have vastly different tastes" and leave it at that, to be honest.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
This might genuinely be the first time I've seen anyone argue that the plastic Prince is "better sculpted" than the metal one.

There's a nut for every bolt, I guess.

At least i don't need to use a bloody angle grinder, a soldering iron, a drill and thirty layers of paint to get it to look decent-ish and stay in one place.

I'm starting to think you're arguing just for the sake of arguing, everyone knows metal was hard to work with, but it made for nice looking models, that's the point.

It really didn't. With maybe a few exceptions.

It really did. With maybe a few exceptions.

But please, we've given this topic way more time than it deserves, we get it, you don't like the older models, obviously some people do. It has nothing to do with the News and Rumours related to TOW, I can guarantee GW aren't going to be releasing any more metal models so you don't have to hide under your bed crying that the bad metal man will come and get you.