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.
Considering they're potentially up to 6 months later, will the made-to-order version of this mini be the same packaging as the one available at the moment? I doubt it will be different as the site page shows the same packaging, but would just be a bit of an annoyance if it gets a different box because of the new logo and such.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/09/19 20:55:54
Overread wrote: I think its purely a design choice for more dynamic models. I dont' think the 3rd parties come into it at all really.
Of course they did. The shift in miniature design came after the CHS debacle.
Nice. I'd like to follow this line of logic and thank CHS for also bringing us Primaris marines, Adeptus Titanicus, plastic Sisters, Genestealer cult, vastly expanded terrain options, etc etc etc etc.
New designs are unrelated to third party manufacturers though.
Mentlegen324 wrote: Considering they're potentially up to 6 months later, will the made-to-order version of this mini be the same packaging as the one available at the moment? I doubt it will be different as the site page shows the same packaging, but would just be a bit of an annoyance if it gets a different box because of the new logo and such.
Amulius, Varus & Tariana Palos all came in the same boxes they were originally available in.
JWBS wrote: New designs are unrelated to third party manufacturers though.
But the way the miniatures are designed, with fewer posing options, fewer options, and so on, are directly related. That was the point that either you ignored, missed, or simply failed to understand.
JWBS wrote: New designs are unrelated to third party manufacturers though.
But the way the miniatures are designed, with fewer posing options, fewer options, and so on, are directly related. That was the point that either you ignored, missed, or simply failed to understand.
All you've done is noted a weak correlation, mistaken it for causation, then falsely asserted that newer stuff is more limited.
Behold, the awesomely modular tactical squad. So incredibly poseable, much options. Amazing.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
JWBS wrote: New designs are unrelated to third party manufacturers though.
But the way the miniatures are designed, with fewer posing options, fewer options, and so on, are directly related. That was the point that either you ignored, missed, or simply failed to understand.
All you've done is noted a weak correlation, mistaken it for causation, then falsely asserted that newer stuff is more limited.
You don't suspect that things like the current Canoness profile ("Can be armed with a bolt pistol if also equipped with a chainsword. Can swap the bolt pistol for a plasma pistol if it's the last week of the month. If equipped with a chainsword and plasma pistol, can be equipped with a rod of office if Mars, Venus and Saturn are aligned." ...or something along those lines) is influenced by trying to stop other companies from supplying extra bits? If that's not the reason, what is? It certainly isn't about limiting options for a smoother gameplay experience, and neither does game balance appear to be a logical explanation.
H.B.M.C. wrote: You're being intentionally obtuse. Or just plain old dishonest.
Not even a little bit. Those marines are no more adaptable than the current batch, they come with far fewer options, and the new designs aren't related to third parties. Everything you say on this topic is incorrect.
JWBS wrote: New designs are unrelated to third party manufacturers though.
But the way the miniatures are designed, with fewer posing options, fewer options, and so on, are directly related. That was the point that either you ignored, missed, or simply failed to understand.
All you've done is noted a weak correlation, mistaken it for causation, then falsely asserted that newer stuff is more limited.
You don't suspect that things like the current Canoness profile ("Can be armed with a bolt pistol if also equipped with a chainsword. Can swap the bolt pistol for a plasma pistol if it's the last week of the month. If equipped with a chainsword and plasma pistol, can be equipped with a rod of office if Mars, Venus and Saturn are aligned." ...or something along those lines) is influenced by trying to stop other companies from supplying extra bits? If that's not the reason, what is? It certainly isn't about limiting options for a smoother gameplay experience, and neither does game balance appear to be a logical explanation.
How are they stopping companies from supplying extra stuff by limiting options? Third party makers always made stuff that was already available from GW, and it's the same now. Backpacks, shoulders, heads, weapons, GW always supplied them, third parties always sold alternates, and it's still the same in both cases. I can show you a ton of third party designer / manufacturers if you want, they're still in business, still expanding their ranges to match GW. If GW have tried to put them out of business they've failed, but they aren't trying to so the theory is moot.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/09/20 11:42:46
JWBS wrote: New designs are unrelated to third party manufacturers though.
But the way the miniatures are designed, with fewer posing options, fewer options, and so on, are directly related. That was the point that either you ignored, missed, or simply failed to understand.
All you've done is noted a weak correlation, mistaken it for causation, then falsely asserted that newer stuff is more limited.
You don't suspect that things like the current Canoness profile ("Can be armed with a bolt pistol if also equipped with a chainsword. Can swap the bolt pistol for a plasma pistol if it's the last week of the month. If equipped with a chainsword and plasma pistol, can be equipped with a rod of office if Mars, Venus and Saturn are aligned." ...or something along those lines) is influenced by trying to stop other companies from supplying extra bits? If that's not the reason, what is? It certainly isn't about limiting options for a smoother gameplay experience, and neither does game balance appear to be a logical explanation.
How are they stopping companies from supplying extra stuff by limiting options? Third party makers always made stuff that was already available from GW, and it's the same now. Backpacks, shoulders, heads, weapons, GW always supplied them, third parties always sold alternates, and it's still the same in both cases. I can show you a ton of third party designer / manufacturers if you want, they're still in business, still expanding their ranges to match GW. If GW have tried to put them out of business they've failed, but they aren't trying to so the theory is moot.
Because they only allow the options for which they sell models to exist in the rules.
The rules for the Canoness state that she can't have a brazier of holy fire if she is armed with a power sword or blessed blade, only if she is armed with a chainsword. As it happens, those weapons are held in the same arm for GW's Canoness miniature, but the chainsword is also included as a sheathed version, so the mini can be built to have a chainsword and brazier, but not a power sword and brazier. As such, the rules are conveniently limited by how the miniature can be built (and only the current version, some load-outs befitting older sculpts are removed). This in turn means there is far less reason for other companies to produce, say, a backpack with sheathed power sword for this mini, as the existing figure can already be built in the limited ways it can be equipped. There is also no reason for them to produce a Canoness with a jump pack, as the rules don't allow for it, because GW don't produce a model for it. While it doesn't fully stop other companies from producing miniatures or bits, GW takes away their potential niche in the market by covering all available options themselves - not by themselves providing sculpts for many options, but by limiting the rules to the few they sell. Now, I'm not so much concerned with how that affects these other companies, but the resulting limitations in the rules (and modelling of the figures) are certainly a shame, and implemented for no other reason than to deprive potential third companies from supplying the missing bits. That the rules become near-illegible and players limited in both their gameplay and modelling options is apparently a price GW is happy to pay.
H.B.M.C. wrote: You're being intentionally obtuse. Or just plain old dishonest.
Not even a little bit. Those marines are no more adaptable than the current batch, they come with far fewer options, and the new designs aren't related to third parties. Everything you say on this topic is incorrect.
Umm... no? Those tacticals were built around ~20 years of space marines where a selling point was their modular nature, interacting with nearly every other infantry kit in various power armored lines. The intercessors came with 3 bolters that are barely distinguishable and a little do-dad to stick on one and call a special weapon, and it took multiple upgrade packs before their sergeants had in-codex rules for gear choices, which still don't impact things as much as some of the old tacticals could do. At least the heads are interchangeable but even the shoulders were designed to be distinct. If the question is cosmetic, a tactical box came with more immediately identifiable different weapons. If the question is mechanical, heavy, special, and sergeant weapons outweigh different types of bolters. If the question is combinatory options, you can get a ton of options out of non-fixed torsos etc.
It's cool if you like the new models for aesthetic reasons or because you don't feel the new parts breakdown harms their flexibility for your purposes, but it's very difficult to argue primaris are more adaptable and come with more options than the older kits.
Nice. I'd like to follow this line of logic and thank CHS for also bringing us Primaris marines, Adeptus Titanicus, plastic Sisters, Genestealer cult, vastly expanded terrain options, etc etc etc etc.
New designs are unrelated to third party manufacturers though.
Point of fact, GW made the primaris as a direct result of CHS' 'True Scale' marines.
How are they stopping companies from supplying extra stuff by limiting options? Third party makers always made stuff that was already available from GW, and it's the same now. Backpacks, shoulders, heads, weapons, GW always supplied them, third parties always sold alternates, and it's still the same in both cases. I can show you a ton of third party designer / manufacturers if you want, they're still in business, still expanding their ranges to match GW. If GW have tried to put them out of business they've failed, but they aren't trying to so the theory is moot.
I dunno about anyone else here, but I've been the recipient of a GW C&D for the old Dark Reign 40kRPG site. So I have to suggest that this isn't entirely true. GW has sued quite a number of bits producers over the years, but after this loss in the Chapterhouse case, they've adjusted their approach.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/09/20 16:29:33
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
