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.

Slaanesh has never been my cup of tea and this release does not change it. However, I am happy that Slaanesh finally gets the attention that it deserves. The previous release already had some nice miniatures but it was quickly forgotten with only one week in spotlight.

Personally I am not a fan of new Slaanesh miniatures but I can totally understand why many are.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I mean,, if a model drops on a floor, anything can break, not just flimsy parts. if we where constatnly worry about peices coming off, we might as well play with carboard cut outs.
Use a glue like Plastic weld and you aint gotta problem really.

That's ridiculous. "It is technically possible that any model can break if dropped" doesn't lead to "so considering whether a model's design makes it excessively fragile is pointless" by any sane, rational measure.

I've accidentally trodden on some plastic models before without any serious ill effects(to the models, my feet were another matter), that has no bearing on the fact that a lot of modern GW models are so flimsy parts of them can break on the sprue while still inside a sealed box, and others will break when simply removing the parts from the sprue as-directed. Not to mention all of the tiny thin trailing details that can catch on anything from case foam to your own sleeve and snap off, leaving a contact surface so small repairing it is a nonsense idea, or the parts that are now so thin they resist conversions - I'd hoped to turn the leader model from the Khainite elves Underworlds box into a Sorceress, but I had to put the project aside because it's not physically possible to swap the spear out for a staff without replacing the entire arm and resculpting accordingly, since both the haft and the wrist are so thin they can't be drilled and pinned, and provide almost no surface area to glue with cement.

These models being fragile and flimsy often absolutely is a thing.


EDIT: I will say, hold off judging Lelith's face until we see the unpainted models. Time and again recently GW has proven their sculptors are perfectly capable of creating female faces, and their painters are perfectly capable of making them look like badly made up drag queens. They should really get the 'Eavy Metal painters to watch some youtube makeup tutorials or something.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Doesn't look that bad to me. Thighs have armour on, and the feet look fine.

But in lore, isn't she supposed to have very little armor? Even by wych cult standards? I seem to recall that being a point somewhere along the line.

Don't know, but still, does it really matter? For me it's more rule of cool anyway

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Doesn't look that bad to me. Thighs have armour on, and the feet look fine.

But in lore, isn't she supposed to have very little armor? Even by wych cult standards? I seem to recall that being a point somewhere along the line.

Don't know, but still, does it really matter? For me it's more rule of cool anyway

Does it matter if the next incarnation of Tycho doesn't have a mask?

They are pretty clearly removing scantily-clad women from the 40k IP, and there isn't much point fighting against it because it's not a decision driven by lore but rather by real-life marketing considerations. Saying "but Lelith is the exception! She is supposed to be that way" will get you nowhere with a marketing executive who could care less about "the lore."

That said, the model fails on its own terms. The rest of the eldar line proves that they are perfectly capable of creating lithe, dexterous armored warriors that don't have huge hobbit feet and don't look like they just ate a huge christmas dinner. All the compositional choices on the model reinforce the short and squat impression, and that's just terrible design.

yukishiro1 wrote:
They are pretty clearly removing scantily-clad women from the 40k IP, and there isn't much point fighting against it because it's not a decision driven by lore but rather by real-life marketing considerations. Saying "but Lelith is the exception! She is supposed to be that way" will get you nowhere with a marketing executive who could care less about "the lore."

That said, the model fails on its own terms. The rest of the eldar line proves that they are perfectly capable of creating lithe, dexterous armored warriors that don't have huge hobbit feet and don't look like they just ate a huge christmas dinner. All the compositional choices on the model reinforce the short and squat impression, and that's just terrible design.

So who is in charge of AOS then? I mean the new hedonites brings out the issue further in my opinion especially since we can see a comparison. Unless the AOS team just has more general freedom to do things. I wonder if the rumour that most designers want to be on the AOS team seems to actually be true then?

Looking at Lelith's current model, the new one's pretty faithful. The bra/shirt's a bit longer, but its the same design. Same glove on the right hand, the legs have the same style armor, etc. The only real difference is her legs aren't as exposed. I don't think the new model is more heavily armored, the only "big" difference is you can't see as much as her thighs. Which some might hate, since Lelith is known for her lack of attire, but the new one really isn't different

yukishiro1 wrote:
They are pretty clearly removing scantily-clad women from the 40k IP, and there isn't much point fighting against it because it's not a decision driven by lore but rather by real-life marketing considerations. Saying "but Lelith is the exception! She is supposed to be that way" will get you nowhere with a marketing executive who could care less about "the lore."

Yet another win for the recasters who're still put out things like Juan Diaz Daemonettes and companies like Raging Heroes.

Call me crazy but my favourite pose for models is "both legs on the ground"

Surprised to see so much controversy over the new Lelith, although at the moment I am slightly leaning towards favouring the old metal/finecast sculpt. Need to see a 360.

Yeah, I think people is overreacting a few weirdly taken photos.

Everyone deserve to show their opinions, but let's just wait until we see the whole model in 3D.

shinros wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
They are pretty clearly removing scantily-clad women from the 40k IP, and there isn't much point fighting against it because it's not a decision driven by lore but rather by real-life marketing considerations. Saying "but Lelith is the exception! She is supposed to be that way" will get you nowhere with a marketing executive who could care less about "the lore."

That said, the model fails on its own terms. The rest of the eldar line proves that they are perfectly capable of creating lithe, dexterous armored warriors that don't have huge hobbit feet and don't look like they just ate a huge christmas dinner. All the compositional choices on the model reinforce the short and squat impression, and that's just terrible design.

So who is in charge of AOS then? I mean the new hedonites brings out the issue further in my opinion especially since we can see a comparison. Unless the AOS team just has more general freedom to do things. I wonder if the rumour that most designers want to be on the AOS team seems to actually be true then?

The Hedonites are equally scantily-clad, whether male or female, so that's a bit different.

But yes, the Hedonites are way, way, way better models than Lelith. I don't know if that says anything about AOS vs 40k generally, though.

I think it's both: a sculpt that is by no means anymore "wow" than the previous. Plus a sloppy paintjob on top.

I quite like the Slaanesh. As someone pointed out, there's some Conan the Barbarian vibes there. It will be a nightmare to paint, though

JWBS wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Doesn't look that bad to me. Thighs have armour on, and the feet look fine.

But in lore, isn't she supposed to have very little armor? Even by wych cult standards? I seem to recall that being a point somewhere along the line.

Don't know, but still, does it really matter? For me it's more rule of cool anyway

Does it matter if the next incarnation of Tycho doesn't have a mask?

Little bit of a false equivalence there. A mask is an objective reality. 'not very much armour' is a subjective sliding scale depending on people's viewpoint.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Call me crazy but my favourite pose for models is "both legs on the ground"

To be honest, this seems like a recent problem.

For example, I think Harlequins and Scourges look pretty good with just one foot on the ground. Indeed, I've used Scourge legs in several conversions because I think they're an excellent way to give a model a dynamic pose without going over the top.

I think the problem is that GW seems to have lost the ability to pose models in ways that look natural. Many of the recent ones either have completely unnatural poses or else look like they're in the process of falling off of whatever stupid piece of rock they're standing on.

shinros wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
They are pretty clearly removing scantily-clad women from the 40k IP, and there isn't much point fighting against it because it's not a decision driven by lore but rather by real-life marketing considerations. Saying "but Lelith is the exception! She is supposed to be that way" will get you nowhere with a marketing executive who could care less about "the lore."

That said, the model fails on its own terms. The rest of the eldar line proves that they are perfectly capable of creating lithe, dexterous armored warriors that don't have huge hobbit feet and don't look like they just ate a huge christmas dinner. All the compositional choices on the model reinforce the short and squat impression, and that's just terrible design.

So who is in charge of AOS then? I mean the new hedonites brings out the issue further in my opinion especially since we can see a comparison. Unless the AOS team just has more general freedom to do things. I wonder if the rumour that most designers want to be on the AOS team seems to actually be true then?

Good lord, if I had the choice I'd take the glorious chaotic freedom of AOS over Space Marine Hellzone all day every day. What artist WOULDN'T pick AOS over 40k?

 vipoid wrote:


I think the problem is that GW seems to have lost the ability to pose models in ways that look natural. Many of the recent ones either have completely unnatural poses or else look like they're in the process of falling off of whatever stupid piece of rock they're standing on.

Or they are action poses based off photography at key moments. See the thing is humans have pretty slow resolution for motion, from what I recall we only see something around 25fps. As a result a lot of fast motion is mostly a blur to us and we only get a rough sense of the movement. Break out a camera and you can freeze things and see motion that otherwise might be invisible.

Take the Deathriders


The pose in the middle might be argued to be odd as only one leg of four is actually touching the ground. Meanwhile the right one has a more spread out pose that looks a touch ungainly.

However if you use photography you can see horses make those moves in perfectly normal strides as part of the complete set of motions their legs go through. Heck you see dogs* do similar motions



Here we see a similar motion, one leg connecting, the other three not with one just about to connect.




These are "real" motion poses and might well be the kind of thing sculptors are working with.
However there's real and real. If we go back to the deathriders the pose on the far right would not be the kind that would win an award in a photography competition. It's pose isn't "attractive" nor "desirable". So whilst its a perfectly natural part of the gait of the animal and rider its not what you'd want or what others would desire. It's not that "classic" grace of motion.


GW sculptors are likely doing just that. Some are working clearly with some classic artistic poses and styles; whilst in other cases they are working with real life motion and form, but branching outside of the purely artistic concepts (some of which can actually be very unnatural). So perhaps they are actually doing stuff too naturally!



*and I only picked dogs because I know I had that photo whilst finding one of a horse doing the same might take me hours or might be one I don't have since I don't tend to do that kind of photography - capturing those split second "classic attractive" positions is very challenging at best.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

shinros wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
They are pretty clearly removing scantily-clad women from the 40k IP, and there isn't much point fighting against it because it's not a decision driven by lore but rather by real-life marketing considerations. Saying "but Lelith is the exception! She is supposed to be that way" will get you nowhere with a marketing executive who could care less about "the lore."

That said, the model fails on its own terms. The rest of the eldar line proves that they are perfectly capable of creating lithe, dexterous armored warriors that don't have huge hobbit feet and don't look like they just ate a huge christmas dinner. All the compositional choices on the model reinforce the short and squat impression, and that's just terrible design.

So who is in charge of AOS then? I mean the new hedonites brings out the issue further in my opinion especially since we can see a comparison. Unless the AOS team just has more general freedom to do things. I wonder if the rumour that most designers want to be on the AOS team seems to actually be true then?

Good lord, if I had the choice I'd take the glorious chaotic freedom of AOS over Space Marine Hellzone all day every day. What artist WOULDN'T pick AOS over 40k?

It might also be that many of the things we want for 40K have already been designed years ago. Either in concept art or all the way to model masters. Some armies might be sitting there with several masters potentially ready go to for the same model and just needing a manager to sign off and a production slot. Meanwhile AoS is very fresh and new; there's no backlog of 30 years design work and far more room for creatives to come up with fresh ideas. Look at the Ossiarchs or Idoneth - ideas that are clearly very new to GW if not totally new. Or very old ideas brought out from the vaults that haven't been touched in decades (and thus are born again fresh).

So yep I can see why designers might well want to jump onto AoS. However there might also be other internal politics as well - eg as noted the dominance of marine releases might well be a bore for some designers as well; or might be a pain for those who do design outside of them in getting their creations made and not endlessly shelved or put to one side etc.... Whilst Gw makes a fortune off marines and we can't ignore that they have helped build and grow GW to what we know and love today; there are also downsides to such a marketing and sales strategy.

 vipoid wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Call me crazy but my favourite pose for models is "both legs on the ground"

To be honest, this seems like a recent problem.

It isn't really. It goes back to the last metal wardancers, and so many elves since have been 'elf on tactical rock.'
Other models too (the Chaos Marine Master of Possession and his Warner Brothers cartoon airwalking while his cloak lifts him off the ground is the ultimate low point), but its particularly egregious with elves and space elfs (the witch elves being a great example, as they _all_ seem intent on dodging imaginary lava)

I think Overread is being typically over-generous with his action photography theory. GW sculptors are just obsessed with the idea of 'dynamic' static models despite it being an oxymoron, and the the product line suffers from absurdity as a result.
I'd much rather a return to practicality. No rock perching or rock jumping, no spirits, cloaks or hair deadlifting armored soldiers, just head weapons and feet set in a practical manner, with as few fragile bits and bobs as possible.

Two legs on the ground is honestly kinda boring TBH.
Let me see some motion and some flow to the model.

Voss wrote:

I think Overread is being typically over-generous with his action photography theory. GW sculptors are just obsessed with the idea of 'dynamic' static models despite it being an oxymoron, and the the product line suffers from absurdity as a result.
I'd much rather a return to practicality. No rock perching or rock jumping, no spirits, cloaks or hair deadlifting armored soldiers, just head weapons and feet set in a practical manner, with as few fragile bits and bobs as possible.

As much as I love Khinerai models I do have to agree on the practicalities side of things. I see it as a symptom of digital sculpting. If you physically sculpt you'd be putting in supports just to make your own job easier; but with digital you can go utterly wild and some of the weak points don't likely become evident till you're way down the production line. Thing is Khinerai could keep their poses as they are, keep all that fantastic suggestion of motion and then put a rock or something for their leg to be "kicking off" or "Swinging past" so that they've at least two contact points to the base not just their thin tail.


But its not just GW. Look at Raging heroes and other brands, its something that is spreading through miniature design right now (perhaps GW is encouraging it or its just the general shift from physical to digital sculptors and the new gen of digital need that experience to realise how to give high motion high dynamic poses with proper supports for practical gaming).

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Two legs on the ground is honestly kinda boring TBH.
Let me see some motion and some flow to the model.

Both can be accomplished with out rock jumping and with a practical, sturdy model as the end result.
The current trend is basically a visual cheat, with no regard to the end product or its use as a game piece.

For the last several years, GW has always liked to have their miniatures posed on their "tactical rocks". Probably not going away anytime soon.

Voss wrote:

Spoiler:

 vipoid wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Call me crazy but my favourite pose for models is "both legs on the ground"

To be honest, this seems like a recent problem.

It isn't really. It goes back to the last metal wardancers, and so many elves since have been 'elf on tactical rock.'
Other models too (the Chaos Marine Master of Possession and his Warner Brothers cartoon airwalking while his cloak lifts him off the ground is the ultimate low point), but its particularly egregious with elves and space elfs (the witch elves being a great example, as they _all_ seem intent on dodging imaginary lava)

I think Overread is being typically over-generous with his action photography theory. GW sculptors are just obsessed with the idea of 'dynamic' static models despite it being an oxymoron, and the the product line suffers from absurdity as a result.
I'd much rather a return to practicality. No rock perching or rock jumping, no spirits, cloaks or hair deadlifting armored soldiers, just head weapons and feet set in a practical manner, with as few fragile bits and bobs as possible.

As it happens, those Wardancers managed a trick that many recent figures seem to haver forgotten: have figures in different poses than leaping. The whole set of their sculps has only a few different versions of the legs that are repeated. Only one is somewhat leaping forwards, and in a less extreme manner than what you'd see in most modern sculpts; and being on the ground, it's equal parts running and leaping. Another is dodging. Another running, with the front leg touching the ground rather than the one at the back, something they seem to have forgotten how to do in AoS/40k - every Witch Elf or Howling Banshee just has the back leg extended and touching the ground/conveniently placed stone structure. They could take somes cues from BloodBowl, where some figures at least manage a more natural and interesting dynamic look. Anyway, it's a problem that certainly goes back some years, with the worst offender possibly being the latest Bloodthirster. It's a design choice presumably fuelled by whatever in-house style GW prefers, perhaps exploring the possibilities of plastic over metal (maybe purposefully used to make new figures stand out from the previous incarnations?), and certainly caused by thinking about whether you can, rather than whether you should (i.e., for figures that are intended as bloody gaming pieces). See also: Balancy McBalance, Lumineth Mr. Alarith Stonemage.

Still shocked the new giant actually has both feet solidly on the ground to be honest.

Imagine if The AoS Mega Giant was leaping off a rock larger than it is, it would be bloody Titan-sized

yeah, all the leaping from rocks ish needs to stop. I hate overly grandiose poses in minis, you can create motion and feel with much subtler adjustments than that.

If everything gets dialed to 11 ALL THE TIME, there is no sense of scale/dynamics. It all just becomes a samey mush

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Two legs on the ground is honestly kinda boring TBH.
Let me see some motion and some flow to the model.

I'd rather have a boring model than one with motion if that motion is accomplished by said model leaping off a rock twice as tall as it, with only it's 12 feet long hair connecting it to the ground

You definitely can have dynamic models without
tactical rock, goofy hairs or smoke all over the place.

After all these years a lot of older metal models,
even with the limits from the medium (metal) at the time
are quite dynamic in my opinion.

Take the Diaz deamonettes, both mounted and on foot
for an example: still pretty dynamic to me without all this
stuff.

Why? I feel sometimes it it is good to
remember the basics: good posing, anatomy.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Two legs on the ground is honestly kinda boring TBH.
Let me see some motion and some flow to the model.

I'd rather have a boring model than one with motion if that motion is accomplished by said model leaping off a rock twice as tall as it, with only it's 12 feet long hair connecting it to the ground

What he said.

Too many 'gaming' figures are sculpted straight from an artists idealised vision rather than taking physical use into consideration.

 tauist wrote:
If everything gets dialed to 11 ALL THE TIME, there is no sense of scale/dynamics. It all just becomes a samey mush

I think part of the issue is that they're not just jumping off a small, convenient rock but instead have to be leaping from a massive piece of scenery.

In other words, it feels almost like a shop-bought conversion. Except somehow posed more awkwardly.

Tactical rocks do kind of annoy me. Captain Morgan poses are a dime a dozen. The ones I really hate are when the rock is specific scenery, like all the building rubble on the Indomitus Necrons. Don’t do that! It doesn’t match my basing. The worst offenders have to be the Eliminators kit though. Weird flat debris stuff they’re kneeling on. Not like cool poses, just kneeling. And it’s hard to remove simply because it’s not level, their feet and knees are all at weird angles not parallel with their bases. It was stupid and annoying.