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.

Lets see, Logan on Stormrider, Taurox, Centurions, Thunderwolf Cav probably a lot more but those off the top of my head.

Long live Stormrider.

Deredeo dreadnought. First time I saw it in real life I complimented its looks, and everyone arroynd the table started protesting, claiming it looks like silly looking boat etc...
I knew o had to get one of them (three), and it is still one of my top 5 models of all times.

Nemesis Dreadknight.

IMO the gold standard of what a Marine Walker should be.

Oh, all sorts. Dreadknight. Forgefiend. Lord Of Skulls. I draw the line at Grimnir Claus though.

Grimgold wrote:I love the Monolith, it hasn't been good on the table since third, but I've run one in a lot of lists because it's such an iconic piece of kit.

I thought the Monolith was so hated not so much because of its appearance, beyond being a little plain, but more to do with the difficulty in construction and transport.

Wibe wrote:Deredeo dreadnought. First time I saw it in real life I complimented its looks, and everyone arroynd the table started protesting, claiming it looks like silly looking boat etc...
I knew o had to get one of them (three), and it is still one of my top 5 models of all times.

I just Googled Deredeo dreadnought. I think it looks a lot like a 40k-fied Battletech/Robotech walker, and also think it looks cool. It looks like a nice AAA gun platform.

Crispy78 wrote:Oh, all sorts. Dreadknight. Forgefiend. Lord Of Skulls. I draw the line at Grimnir Claus though.

I never really got the dislike for the Chaos dinobots. Well, I do for the Helldrake since it was crazy OP on release due flyer rules being have vs. have nots. But appearance wise, sure they probably could have been more daemonic/Chaos, but they were step or two above what CSM had before aesthetically at the time and really started to make them more than spiky marines and a Defiler.

I'm not sure this is "most other people", but there does seem to be a grown contengency of people who dislike the the basic ork boy box. Which is a shame, because I think that kit is almost perfect: a lot of good bits which allows for great variation in an army meant to represent individual warriors, with solid sculpts with good character. the only thing that looks bad is the nob parts (that weird gangly slugga arm and the torso that somehow looks more static than the others). You're better using nobs from the actual nob kit to lead your boyz, since that's also an amazing kit.

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Are you saying that everything ancient Norse pagans came up with was cool and none of it could possibly have looked ludicrous? Goat chariot? Clouds made of giant brains?

Noooo… I'm pretty sure they're just saying that the "Santa" jokes can get a bit old sometimes, and that a lot of the people making those jokes are probably ignorant of the Nordic myths the designers were actually referencing, which makes them seem a bit silly…

You really like your hyperbolic strawmen, Anamorander…

Crispy78 wrote:
Oh, all sorts. Dreadknight. Forgefiend. Lord Of Skulls. I draw the line at Grimnir Claus though.

I really like the Lord of Skulls Back before it got a model and stats, I tried to scratchbuild one (first time trying to SB, didn't go well), and had whole plans for a traitor guard regiment created around the theme... Unfortunately (or luckily? ) I was a teenager with a less than stellar teenage work ethic, so I never got far


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

And IIRC, Odin / Woden actually did have a flying sled in Norse/Germanic myth!

And thats exactly why he's cool

yup, sadly most people see it and go "urrr santa" not understanding it's more a case of santa and Logan both borrowing from the same Pagan imagry

Are you saying that everything ancient Norse pagans came up with was cool and none of it could possibly have looked ludicrous? Goat chariot? Clouds made of giant brains?

Goats are fierce and heavens made of scalps are pretty cool tho...

In regards to Odin imagery and Logan Grimnar. I'm not a fan of the sleigh, mostly because a pulled, ground bound chariot (even a grav-chariot) makes little sense in context of what he could have chosen as his personal transport. If GW wanted to reinforce the Odin symbolism, have his chariot be pulled by two giant mecha-ravens and let it be a flyer. Or go with the most iconic and best known steed of Odin and let Grimnar ride a giant, eight legged mechanical horse... that would look grim. Everything does not have to be a wolf just because it is in the name...

I do like the two wolves pulling the chariot a bit more than the mutated roid-monsters some of the other thunder wolves are tho.

EDIT: Grimnar's ride is also designed to be reminiscent of the prow of a migration era/viking long boat... now, I might misremember, but does Fenris even have seas?

I'd say in general, the 2nd edition metal miniatures.

As an aging and increasingly curmudgeony(?) gamer, I just don't really care about 17-piece plastic infantry miniatures or overly dynamic "jumping off a pedestal while my hair and various bits whirl around me" styled miniatures.

I'm 100% fine with a simple, attractive, nicely sculpted one piece metal miniatures. I don't care that my infantry units have 3-4 poses. They're easy to paint, robust, look fine, and I don't have to waste time assembling miniatures. I appreciate build-a-bear kits in many circumstances, but I don't dislike simple metal miniatures at all. I think my attitude is heavily influenced by my viewing gaming miniatures as that; gaming miniatures first and foremost. The more outlandish, fragile, hard-to-transport miniatures become the less appealing they are to me. Same goes for resin miniatures which I avoid whenever possible.

Do I prefer plastic over finecast or resin? Of course. Do I adore older ugly metal miniatures? No. But 2nd edition Jes Goodwin Eldar, for example, are 100% fine with me. I don't need anything else. I don't give two gaks about 2D sculpted miniatures, etc. They're still plenty attractive and useful.

 Elbows wrote:
I'd say in general, the 2nd edition metal miniatures.

As an aging and increasingly curmudgeony(?) gamer, I just don't really care about 17-piece plastic infantry miniatures or overly dynamic "jumping off a pedestal while my hair and various bits whirl around me" styled miniatures.

This is going a bit off topic, but I bought a Slaves to Darkness Corvus Cabal yesterday, mostly to use them as bases for conversions and to steal cool stuff for other miniatures. What a nightmare. They might all have very dynamic poses, have pretty neat designs, and they might TECHNICALLY be multi-pose... but in fact they are more akin to multi piece single pose miniatures. I do not for the life of me get why they have chosen to cut up and design the sprues in such a way. For example, lots of miniatures have their faces attached (rather flimsily) to their bodies, and the rest of their heads separate... the conspiratorial part of my brain thinks GW is messing with me, and I am not amused.

 Aestas wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I'd say in general, the 2nd edition metal miniatures.

As an aging and increasingly curmudgeony(?) gamer, I just don't really care about 17-piece plastic infantry miniatures or overly dynamic "jumping off a pedestal while my hair and various bits whirl around me" styled miniatures.

This is going a bit off topic, but I bought a Slaves to Darkness Corvus Cabal yesterday, mostly to use them as bases for conversions and to steal cool stuff for other miniatures. What a nightmare. They might all have very dynamic poses, have pretty neat designs, and they might TECHNICALLY be multi-pose... but in fact they are more akin to multi piece single pose miniatures. I do not for the life of me get why they have chosen to cut up and design the sprues in such a way. For example, lots of miniatures have their faces attached (rather flimsily) to their bodies, and the rest of their heads separate... the conspiratorial part of my brain thinks GW is messing with me, and I am not amused.

It's a bit of two-fold. On one hand they are trying to "hide" joins, and are really making multi-part single pose minis. The other part of it is that they've abandoned plug-and-play miniature design because it hampers 3rd party vendors from creating alternate bits for people to kit-bash with. The days of "any torso goes to any legs...using any arms" design is dead within GW. The more convoluted the joins, the less modular/3rd party friendly it is.

 Elbows wrote:

 Aestas wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
I'd say in general, the 2nd edition metal miniatures.

As an aging and increasingly curmudgeony(?) gamer, I just don't really care about 17-piece plastic infantry miniatures or overly dynamic "jumping off a pedestal while my hair and various bits whirl around me" styled miniatures.

This is going a bit off topic, but I bought a Slaves to Darkness Corvus Cabal yesterday, mostly to use them as bases for conversions and to steal cool stuff for other miniatures. What a nightmare. They might all have very dynamic poses, have pretty neat designs, and they might TECHNICALLY be multi-pose... but in fact they are more akin to multi piece single pose miniatures. I do not for the life of me get why they have chosen to cut up and design the sprues in such a way. For example, lots of miniatures have their faces attached (rather flimsily) to their bodies, and the rest of their heads separate... the conspiratorial part of my brain thinks GW is messing with me, and I am not amused.

It's a bit of two-fold. On one hand they are trying to "hide" joins, and are really making multi-part single pose minis. The other part of it is that they've abandoned plug-and-play miniature design because it hampers 3rd party vendors from creating alternate bits for people to kit-bash with. The days of "any torso goes to any legs...using any arms" design is dead within GW. The more convoluted the joins, the less modular/3rd party friendly it is.

Thanks :-) that seems obviously plausible. But well... it also means I will be checking each and every GW box before I buy it, to see if the miniatures are in fact single pose. When I buy plastic sets, I expect to be able to customize them, if not I will just go elsewhere to get cool looking cultists. I don't mind metal nor resin.

Some late ones from GW have been a bit half-n-half. The Chaos Beastmen from Blackstone Fortress for example. Two body poses, but a couple arm options that you can mix-n-match. The poses are still limited, but you get a few "options" as far as the arms, etc.

The latest newer set i bought was one of the genestealer cult sets (got it for a friend), that one seemed really nice, with tons of options and poseable cuts. So I guess it is a case to case issue...

 Aestas wrote:
The latest newer set i bought was one of the genestealer cult sets (got it for a friend), that one seemed really nice, with tons of options and poseable cuts. So I guess it is a case to case issue...

I think it depends a lot on who the main designer is. Like Maxime Pastuorel seems to be really into doing the dynamic pose stuff, even if it means less modularity and simplicity, I think?

Keep in mind releases are often designed 3-4 years in advance of actually being put on sale, so it's a crap shoot sometimes. People used to flip out when a new product would release in 2015 and the sprue would read "Games Workshop 2012", etc.

This thread is now about how much people dislike dynamic mono-pose models. I knew we could do it!

Quasistellar wrote:
This thread is now about how much people dislike dynamic mono-pose models. I knew we could do it!

Jokes on you, I've come here *specifically* to bring up mono pose minis that I love. Some of the worst offenders in probably GW's history. Kranon the Relentless and Draznicht's Ravagers. These are some of my favorite models ever. They all look totally freaking sweet. They came at a time, the release of 6th, when the Chaos Lord with plasma pistol and daemon blade had an absurd chance to instagib himself and brought little in the way of contribution, and Chosen were a toolbox special weapons unit where "Draznicht's Ravagers" didn't have a unique list entry and we're just confused bizarre melee Chosen with no purpose in life. I mean really, a pair of lightning claws, a powerfist, a power maul, a power sword, a power axe and two dudes with no dual weapons for extra attacks?? These dudes were *expressly* created with the intention of showcasing just how absolutely inane the power weapon rules of 6th and 7th could be. They only thing they lacked was a "power spear" or "Lance" which would have just been a poetically disgusting cherry on a gak cake.

But God do I love them. They were some of my first ever in my life 40k models. I never got to paint them when I first bought them as I was a teen and stupid, however I've recently bought a set second hand (right before GW announce the one week only made to order Dark Vengeance blitz) that I hope to finally do them the justice they never deserved in 6th but deserve from my older steadier hands now.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Literally every Primaris sculpt. Love them. Repulsors are exceptionally cool.

The only one I'm hesitant on are Incursors, because of the visor, but a simple headswap changes that.

So funny because Incursors are my favourite Primaris models, mostly because of the visor!

 bullyboy wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Literally every Primaris sculpt. Love them. Repulsors are exceptionally cool.

The only one I'm hesitant on are Incursors, because of the visor, but a simple headswap changes that.

So funny because Incursors are my favourite Primaris models, mostly because of the visor!

I like the look of the visor as well. I only wish they had heads that have the visor integrated into the helmet. The only sculpt that I like that does exposed heads is the sisters of silence.

 Aestas wrote:
The latest newer set i bought was one of the genestealer cult sets (got it for a friend), that one seemed really nice, with tons of options and poseable cuts. So I guess it is a case to case issue...

it seems like there is currently 3 "tiers" of customizability GW does.

Tier 1 (basically defunct at this point): Ball or flat joint torsos, ball joint heads, flat joint arms.

Tier 2: monopose legs and torsos, fully swappable arms and heads.

Tier 3: swappable heads, 2-3 fixed arm options for each torso. Often these are the super dynamic posed models like Deepkin, or the weird/disfigured models like Death Guard and Aberrants

Tier 4: Total monopose, only one way to put it together

Recent sculpts have mostly seen the introduction of a lot of Tier 3, with basic troop kits like the Neophytes, new space marines, GSC etc being Tier 2 and the main distinction between them and the old-days kits is the fixed waist vs the ball joint waist.

The reason I'm not so fussed about it is I'm used to my elite troops being Tier 4: Total monopose, and made of metal. Often with only 1-2 poses in the whole unit. So for me, getting a unit like Abberrants in 5th ed or whatever, they'd be 2 sculpts in a clampack. Now, I get a plastic kit for them, and I have 5 base sculpts with 10 sets of arms and freely swappable heads. IMO, that's a solid improvement.

I genuinely like Centurions.

Chris Fitzpatrick 's Dark Eldar Wyches. I loved them. Well sculpted for the time and each very characterful.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
I'm not sure this is "most other people", but there does seem to be a grown contengency of people who dislike the the basic ork boy box. Which is a shame, because I think that kit is almost perfect: a lot of good bits which allows for great variation in an army meant to represent individual warriors, with solid sculpts with good character. the only thing that looks bad is the nob parts (that weird gangly slugga arm and the torso that somehow looks more static than the others). You're better using nobs from the actual nob kit to lead your boyz, since that's also an amazing kit.

Totally agree – the Boyz kit is great, *particularly* given its age, and the fact all the bits are swappable with the stuff from all the other Ork kits (e.g. Stormboyz, Lootas, etc) makes it even better imo.

While we're on the subject of older kits, I think the Eldar Guardians and the basic Guard kit get a bit of a bum rap too. The latter could certainly do with a bit more in the way of variety (cf the Boyz kit) but they're both perfectly serviceable kits for yer basic Troops.

 Elbows wrote:
I'd say in general, the 2nd edition metal miniatures.

As an aging and increasingly curmudgeony(?) gamer, I just don't really care about 17-piece plastic infantry miniatures or overly dynamic "jumping off a pedestal while my hair and various bits whirl around me" styled miniatures.

I'm 100% fine with a simple, attractive, nicely sculpted one piece metal miniatures. I don't care that my infantry units have 3-4 poses. They're easy to paint, robust, look fine, and I don't have to waste time assembling miniatures. I appreciate build-a-bear kits in many circumstances, but I don't dislike simple metal miniatures at all. I think my attitude is heavily influenced by my viewing gaming miniatures as that; gaming miniatures first and foremost. The more outlandish, fragile, hard-to-transport miniatures become the less appealing they are to me. Same goes for resin miniatures which I avoid whenever possible.

Do I prefer plastic over finecast or resin? Of course. Do I adore older ugly metal miniatures? No. But 2nd edition Jes Goodwin Eldar, for example, are 100% fine with me. I don't need anything else. I don't give two gaks about 2D sculpted miniatures, etc. They're still plenty attractive and useful.

100% agree with you.
For the local shops current Path to Glory AoS campaign I decided to go with something simple & fun. Mostly because it was starting in Nov. & build/paint time during the Holidays is limited.
So just a hoard of squigs/squig riders....
My God! Was it really necessary to cut even the lowly squigs into that many *&^# pieces??
And after all the trimming from spues & assembly? You know what I had? Mono-pose squigs.

As much as I like the end result of some of the newer kits and as much as I actually enjoy assembling models I have to agree with the above on general principle. An Intercessor is like 16 pieces. A model less than 2" tall should not require cutting out a pile of bits that size.

The Newman wrote:
As much as I like the end result of some of the newer kits and as much as I actually enjoy assembling models I have to agree with the above on general principle. An Intercessor is like 16 pieces. A model less than 2" tall should not require cutting out a pile of bits that size.

In fairness to the Intercessor models, I think the shin/knee guard were done that way to allow for upgrade kits and fit pretty good make sprue gates/mold line fairly easy to clean. The rifles have the center bit missing to differentiate which one the unit has. Head and pauldrons are pretty standard swappable items, belt pouches and pistols holster too. I suppose the chest plate could be swap-able, but I think that is more an issue with chest of the body being too thick to mold right on the sprue. Same with some of the leg poses being more dynamic that sprue height can allow as a single piece. I can't really remember anything else that makes up the Intercessor save the backpack. I have built more than twenty, and I don't remember any particular issue with them.

The Hellblaster gun barrels on the other hand... Trying to get rid of that seam with not gunking them up was a challenge I only kinda succeeded at. I remember the Infiltrator/Incursor kit also had some trouble spots, though, I can't remember exactly what anymore.

I love centurions, lords of skulls, and porphyrions. Nothing says big, dumb firepower quite as well as 40k.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

The Newman wrote:
As much as I like the end result of some of the newer kits and as much as I actually enjoy assembling models I have to agree with the above on general principle. An Intercessor is like 16 pieces. A model less than 2" tall should not require cutting out a pile of bits that size.

In fairness to the Intercessor models, I think the shin/knee guard were done that way to allow for upgrade kits and fit pretty good make sprue gates/mold line fairly easy to clean. The rifles have the center bit missing to differentiate which one the unit has. Head and pauldrons are pretty standard swappable items, belt pouches and pistols holster too. I suppose the chest plate could be swap-able, but I think that is more an issue with chest of the body being too thick to mold right on the sprue. Same with some of the leg poses being more dynamic that sprue height can allow as a single piece. I can't really remember anything else that makes up the Intercessor save the backpack. I have built more than twenty, and I don't remember any particular issue with them.

The Hellblaster gun barrels on the other hand... Trying to get rid of that seam with not gunking them up was a challenge I only kinda succeeded at. I remember the Infiltrator/Incursor kit also had some trouble spots, though, I can't remember exactly what anymore.

I didn't say they were difficult, just tedious. Hellblaster guns, yeah. Gun barrels (emitters, whatever) that are split lengthwise like that are a massive pain to get to look right under the best of circumstances, and those have gates in exactly the wrong places.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Aestas wrote:
The latest newer set i bought was one of the genestealer cult sets (got it for a friend), that one seemed really nice, with tons of options and poseable cuts. So I guess it is a case to case issue...

it seems like there is currently 3 "tiers" of customizability GW does.

Tier 1 (basically defunct at this point): Ball or flat joint torsos, ball joint heads, flat joint arms.

Tier 2: monopose legs and torsos, fully swappable arms and heads.

Tier 3: swappable heads, 2-3 fixed arm options for each torso. Often these are the super dynamic posed models like Deepkin, or the weird/disfigured models like Death Guard and Aberrants

Tier 4: Total monopose, only one way to put it together

Recent sculpts have mostly seen the introduction of a lot of Tier 3, with basic troop kits like the Neophytes, new space marines, GSC etc being Tier 2 and the main distinction between them and the old-days kits is the fixed waist vs the ball joint waist.

The reason I'm not so fussed about it is I'm used to my elite troops being Tier 4: Total monopose, and made of metal. Often with only 1-2 poses in the whole unit. So for me, getting a unit like Abberrants in 5th ed or whatever, they'd be 2 sculpts in a clampack. Now, I get a plastic kit for them, and I have 5 base sculpts with 10 sets of arms and freely swappable heads. IMO, that's a solid improvement.

Just to reply to some of the above posts in one go

I'm not at all opposed to monopose miniatures, and I don't particularly prefer plastic to metal (take my prior post in this tread about the old lizardmen for example. Also, the old Goodwin metal eldars are near perfect). I do however think flimsy plastic kits with tons of weird cuts to enable assemblage of (dynamic) monopose models are a thing from hell. It is the worst of both worlds

You get neither the gaming sturdiness or the nice feel of weight in your hand metal gives you, nor the modeling opportunities well thought out platic sets deliver. Actually, you apperently sometimes gets less... As an old dog in the game, I don't really mind sawing off a metal head or weapon to use on another model, but I find it pretty inconvenient to use a flimsy multipart head (or face ) on anything but the intended miniature in the intended pose.

EDIT: If anyone should wonder. Yes I do realize I'm being pretty ok boomer right now. But sometimes it is just nice to scream into the void