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.
2021/09/02 18:40:26
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
Rihgu wrote: ...A wrong turn? Any evidence to support that? I see only increasing profits for GW, which would suggest to me they made the right turn...
Obviously the only possible data point for whether the game's improving or not is its profitability. The fact that it has a vastly greater marketing budget than anything else in the industry has nothing to do with it, and the fact that it's been very successful at rebranding itself as an accessible entry point into minis games is entirely because of decisions that cut down on game balance and player choice, there'd be no way for the game to be more open and more accessible.
I mean that is how we've chosen to organize our entire society, so dunno what to tell ya. We give the most power and capability to produce things to the companies that make the most profitable products.
The best movies are the ones designed by a focus group to strategically appeal to and be understood by audiences in every single country (but especially asia and the united states) and which have the most recognizable actors playing the most recognizable characters that you know.
The best music is the music you can easily predict the lines to upon first listening and which is designed to get stuck in your head.
The best video games are the ones that use the psychological concepts of skinner boxes to produce seratonin, ideally when the consumer makes small purchases using real-world currency.
The best tabletop games are the ones that convince the most people to buy new armies the most often.
Simple as that. Don't complain about any flaws in that system or that's politics.
I long ago gave up crusading for my own sense of what was good or not, I think around when Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim released. The game didn't appeal to me at all, and I thought it was a wrong turn, and surely Bethesda would suffer for their dumbing down/whatever other complaint I had with it. "The true fans of the Elder Scrolls will see this as garbage!" I probably thought at the time.
It turns out Bethesda can just release Skyrim 20 times and people will keep buying it (not sure if it's the "true fans" I thought I belonged to. More likely the ones buying it are the TRUE true fans). Clearly my idea of what's "good" is not public opinion. If GW's profits are going up, they are making good decisions because apparently the majority of people agree with what they're doing.
I will admit, AnomanderRake is correct. Monopose could very well be a wrong turn, but not a large enough wrong turn to show alongside all of the other right turns they are making re: marketing, whatever else. There isn't any way to cut that little bit of data out of what we know so neither side will ever know whether they're right.
Anyways, sorry if I gave the impression that one shouldn't complain about the flaws in that system. Obviously, I don't agree with it (I've only bought Skyrim once, after all! And gotten it as a gift once, too, but that's besides the point). I just think it's funny/odd when people take the position that things that they disagree with, despite all evidence, are "wrong turns".
They aren't. The lack of ball joint on the waist doesn't make something monopose. That's a definition that has been invented on these forums to bash Primaris marines. No one used to think that Skitarii or GSC were monopose.
At the moment. Obviously swapping a primaris legs onto a normal marine chest might look off... XD But still there is some benefit to being able to rotate/tilt the torso a bit when making the pose of your model.
But with the old models the abdomen looked wrong if you rotated the torso. In the new design it doesn't. And as there are multiple bodies to choose from, you can just choose the one that has the tilt you need.
I've always wanted to do an infantry spam army where every single model that has the same pose. Like, every model is the sister of battle biting the pin out of a grenade, even the Canoness/Palatine(just glue some swords to them) and seraphim (glue jumppacks to them).
2021/09/02 18:59:04
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
Good take imo. There also another factor to consider, namely that there is a significant trend towards convenience. I never understood why YouTubers would do all of these "How to paint an army in one day" or "How to play a game of 40k in 40 minutes" style videos, as it was pretty much the polar opposite of why and how I enjoy this hobby: a slow and intricate buildup of miniatures with a heavy focus on customization. I'd rather leave my stuff unpainted for another month before making sure that I get the paint scheme exactly right. Same for playing games, these would take up half a day back when I still wanted to engage with that side of the hobby – and that wasn't considered a nuisance but rather a feature in our community. It's not even a particularly peculiar thing in my experience, because this culture was fostered first and foremost in our local GW stores.
I had this revelation shortly after the release of Contrast paints, where I couldn't fathom how anyone could possibly go for such an obviously subpar product, because time and convenience never entered the equation for me. I expected it to fail spectacularly, a product that was inherently contradictory to the supposed "goal" of putting the most well crafted army on the table one could manage. The reality, however, seems to be that convenience and time efficiency do play a large role for a significant part of GW customers nowadays and I believe monopose kits are another symptom of this development.
2021/09/02 19:27:47
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
But monopose kits aren't necessarily even easier or quicker to put together. Some of the modern monopose GW kits are a massive pain to assemble. It really varies from kit to kit both re: how much of a pain it is to assemble, and how truly monopose it is.
2021/09/02 20:21:41
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
drbored wrote: If every single release from GW from now on was "monopose", would you still participate in the hobby/buy the product?
For reference, by "Monopose" I mean anything from the Easy to Build kits to the current Space Marine Intercessors kit (that is, fused torso and legs, but different arm/head/weapon options).
If every kit from now on was like the Space Marine Intercessors, or the Chaos Space Marines, or the Battle Sisters from the Sisters of Battle, or the Plague Marines, would you still buy the product?
These kits, due to certain arms not fitting certain bodies, certain weapon options not fitting certain torsos, and the torso and leg options generally being one, immovable piece, are considered "monopose" on top of other things like ETB kits, or kits with near zero options like various things from Blackstone Fortress (guard, cultists, etc).
If I told you there was a 0% chance that we would never see anything more customizable than the above kits, would you still support the company by buying the product?
(This is theoretical, I'm not trying to say that this is 100% the way things will go, this is just a thought exercise. Instead of arguing with various pedantic points, try doing this thought exercise.)
I don't actually care that they're monopose.
Like, seriously, there's only so many discrete ways to pose Guardsmen or older kits anyway, and even then, they still look all the same. It's only actually noticeable when you have a model that's uneccessarily distinct, like the Infiltrator with the pistol out.
Also, like, it's infantry. Who cares? There's between dozens or hundreds of the guys on the board, and also, it's infantry.
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
2021/09/02 20:31:46
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
Rihgu wrote: ...A wrong turn? Any evidence to support that? I see only increasing profits for GW, which would suggest to me they made the right turn...
Obviously the only possible data point for whether the game's improving or not is its profitability. The fact that it has a vastly greater marketing budget than anything else in the industry has nothing to do with it, and the fact that it's been very successful at rebranding itself as an accessible entry point into minis games is entirely because of decisions that cut down on game balance and player choice, there'd be no way for the game to be more open and more accessible.
I mean that is how we've chosen to organize our entire society, so dunno what to tell ya. We give the most power and capability to produce things to the companies that make the most profitable products.
The best movies are the ones designed by a focus group to strategically appeal to and be understood by audiences in every single country (but especially asia and the united states) and which have the most recognizable actors playing the most recognizable characters that you know.
The best music is the music you can easily predict the lines to upon first listening and which is designed to get stuck in your head.
The best video games are the ones that use the psychological concepts of skinner boxes to produce seratonin, ideally when the consumer makes small purchases using real-world currency.
The best tabletop games are the ones that convince the most people to buy new armies the most often.
Simple as that. Don't complain about any flaws in that system or that's politics.
I'm not. I'm complaining about what I see as the insistence that the vast edifice that is 40k is built on some giant fragile house of cards and if you change one tiny detail the whole structure will come crashing down and the game will start losing money. 40k is profitable right now, sure. Is that because the minis are mono-pose or in spite of the minis being mono-pose? Would making the minis less mono-pose make the game less profitable? More profitable? Who can tell? I don't know. You don't know. What annoys me here is the idea that "the game's profitable so shut up" has become such a default answer to any criticism of anything GW does. I know the fact that they're making loads of money means they don't have to care about anything, but changing something small like putting a few more alternate arms into a kit isn't going to magically make GW's vast empire of cash go "poof," and "the game's profitable overall" doesn't mean it does every single thing perfectly.
tl;dr: I'm not complaining about the profit motive, I'm complaining about peoples' poor understanding of cause and effect.
Rihgu wrote: ...A wrong turn? Any evidence to support that? I see only increasing profits for GW, which would suggest to me they made the right turn...
Obviously the only possible data point for whether the game's improving or not is its profitability. The fact that it has a vastly greater marketing budget than anything else in the industry has nothing to do with it, and the fact that it's been very successful at rebranding itself as an accessible entry point into minis games is entirely because of decisions that cut down on game balance and player choice, there'd be no way for the game to be more open and more accessible.
I mean that is how we've chosen to organize our entire society, so dunno what to tell ya. We give the most power and capability to produce things to the companies that make the most profitable products.
The best movies are the ones designed by a focus group to strategically appeal to and be understood by audiences in every single country (but especially asia and the united states) and which have the most recognizable actors playing the most recognizable characters that you know.
The best music is the music you can easily predict the lines to upon first listening and which is designed to get stuck in your head.
The best video games are the ones that use the psychological concepts of skinner boxes to produce seratonin, ideally when the consumer makes small purchases using real-world currency.
The best tabletop games are the ones that convince the most people to buy new armies the most often.
Simple as that. Don't complain about any flaws in that system or that's politics.
On a basic level I enjoy The Lighthouse as much as Pacific Rim. They just fill different emotional needs. Pacific Rim made more money, because it's marketed and accessible to all audiences and, most importantly, fun.
At the same time, because The Lighthouse wasn't a major financial success doesn't demean its value. It just didn't appeal to as many people.
40K appeals to a lot of people and it's fun. As part of that fun the visual aspect of the kits likely contributes - few people are going to turn away, because the kit isn't multi-pose.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/02 20:39:04
2021/09/02 20:49:48
Subject: Re:If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
Goose LeChance wrote: They could give the humans that same detail now without sacrificing the modularity.
In options maybe, not in poses. You can't have fancy poses and mix-and-match sprues, or the poses make no sense and the muscles don't line up. It was not an issue with early models with low detail, but it's much more noticeable with higher definition sculpts.
Yeah, I mean, we had dynamic poses before, it's not like the detail is better in plastic. Why can't we just go back to beautiful models like this?
Thank you for proving my point- the old model has basically no visible details of musculature. Not sure why you posted it, we know old models had low res details, but I guess it visualizes what I meant?
2021/09/02 20:54:46
Subject: Re:If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
alextroy wrote: I didn't say that. I said I like them because they are higher quality sculpts that are much easier to assemble.
I am with you on the former, but must disagree on the latter. I am assembling some of the new Flayed Ones, and they are the most tedious, finicky kits to assemble I have ever seen from GWS. The 6 armed cowboy necron guy was not as fiddly, but certainly much more complex than any previous Necrons.
They are beautiful, sure... but very much not easier to assemble, let alone "much easier to assemble".
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/02 20:58:21
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2021/09/02 21:02:23
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
Good take imo. There also another factor to consider, namely that there is a significant trend towards convenience. I never understood why YouTubers would do all of these "How to paint an army in one day" or "How to play a game of 40k in 40 minutes" style videos, as it was pretty much the polar opposite of why and how I enjoy this hobby: a slow and intricate buildup of miniatures with a heavy focus on customization. I'd rather leave my stuff unpainted for another month before making sure that I get the paint scheme exactly right. Same for playing games, these would take up half a day back when I still wanted to engage with that side of the hobby – and that wasn't considered a nuisance but rather a feature in our community. It's not even a particularly peculiar thing in my experience, because this culture was fostered first and foremost in our local GW stores.
I had this revelation shortly after the release of Contrast paints, where I couldn't fathom how anyone could possibly go for such an obviously subpar product, because time and convenience never entered the equation for me. I expected it to fail spectacularly, a product that was inherently contradictory to the supposed "goal" of putting the most well crafted army on the table one could manage. The reality, however, seems to be that convenience and time efficiency do play a large role for a significant part of GW customers nowadays and I believe monopose kits are another symptom of this development.
Contrast is basically magic for bad painters.
I am a bad painter. I've been a bad painter for almost a decade now. It's very likely I will always be a bad painter. The 'most well crafted army I could manage' pre-contrast just straight up isn't as good as what I can achieve now with a metallic airbrush basecoat and some Talassar blue or Blood Angel red.
It's not a trend towards convenience, the desire for more convenience has always been there, especially with painting. It's also not the only thing products like contrast and 'How to paint an army in one day' offer. For YOU(in your elitist mindset, and yes, it is quite clearly elitist) these products represent a dip in quality or a dumbing down of hobby, but for new players, gamers, or people who just aren't good at the painting side, they represent an increase in convenience AND quality.
Painting keeps more people out of the hobby than anything else. More than price(although price is a close #2 and loses out when you net players gained BY painting), more than rules, more than bad community experiences. It is unbelievably daunting for new players to jump into. Things like Contrast and quick paint videos help make the entire process seem less impossible to people who aren't familiar with miniature painting.
Goose LeChance wrote: They could give the humans that same detail now without sacrificing the modularity.
In options maybe, not in poses. You can't have fancy poses and mix-and-match sprues, or the poses make no sense and the muscles don't line up. It was not an issue with early models with low detail, but it's much more noticeable with higher definition sculpts.
Yeah, I mean, we had dynamic poses before, it's not like the detail is better in plastic. Why can't we just go back to beautiful models like this?
Thank you for proving my point- the old model has basically no visible details of musculature. Not sure why you posted it, we know old models had low res details, but I guess it visualizes what I meant?
He was being sarcastic towards the original poster by including a photo of a rather terrible model.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/02 21:04:28
2021/09/02 21:21:26
Subject: Re:If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
yukishiro1 wrote: But monopose kits aren't necessarily even easier or quicker to put together. Some of the modern monopose GW kits are a massive pain to assemble. It really varies from kit to kit both re: how much of a pain it is to assemble, and how truly monopose it is.
alextroy wrote: I didn't say that. I said I like them because they are higher quality sculpts that are much easier to assemble.
I am with you on the former, but must disagree on the latter. I am assembling some of the new Flayed Ones, and they are the most tedious, finicky kits to assemble I have ever seen from GWS. The 6 armed cowboy necron guy was not as fiddly, but certainly much more complex than any previous Necrons.
They are beautiful, sure... but very much not easier to assemble, let alone "much easier to assemble".
Somehow GW models are getting more monopose but also more complicated to put together. It's genius! Haters gonna hate.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/02 21:38:47
Old World Prediction: The Empire will have stupid Clockwork Paragon Warsuits and Mecha Horses
2021/09/02 21:27:57
Subject: Re:If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
alextroy wrote: I didn't say that. I said I like them because they are higher quality sculpts that are much easier to assemble.
I am with you on the former, but must disagree on the latter. I am assembling some of the new Flayed Ones, and they are the most tedious, finicky kits to assemble I have ever seen from GWS. The 6 armed cowboy necron guy was not as fiddly, but certainly much more complex than any previous Necrons.
They are beautiful, sure... but very much not easier to assemble, let alone "much easier to assemble".
Somehow GW models are getting more monopose but also more complicated to put together. It's genius!
It's like the rules. Simpler, yet somehow in being simpler they become more complicated.
ERJAK wrote: Contrast is basically magic for bad painters.
I am a bad painter. I've been a bad painter for almost a decade now. It's very likely I will always be a bad painter. The 'most well crafted army I could manage' pre-contrast just straight up isn't as good as what I can achieve now with a metallic airbrush basecoat and some Talassar blue or Blood Angel red.
It's not a trend towards convenience, the desire for more convenience has always been there, especially with painting. It's also not the only thing products like contrast and 'How to paint an army in one day' offer. For YOU(in your elitist mindset, and yes, it is quite clearly elitist) these products represent a dip in quality or a dumbing down of hobby, but for new players, gamers, or people who just aren't good at the painting side, they represent an increase in convenience AND quality.
Painting keeps more people out of the hobby than anything else. More than price(although price is a close #2 and loses out when you net players gained BY painting), more than rules, more than bad community experiences. It is unbelievably daunting for new players to jump into. Things like Contrast and quick paint videos help make the entire process seem less impossible to people who aren't familiar with miniature painting.
Yeah, making painting more accessible is great and the Contrast paints are very good for that.
But I still want to debunk the common misconception that they're 'noob paints' and no serious painter would touch them. Whilst I may not be anywhere near Golden Daemon levels, I'd certainly consider myself to be a pretty damn decent painter, and I use Contrast paints a lot. Using translucent layers is simply a different technique, it is more like working with water colours. Now obviously I use normal paints in addition to them, but they're a valuable part of my toolkit. They also help speeding past the boring parts and getting to the more interesting detail work.
Yeah, making painting more accessible is great and the Contrast paints are very good for that.
But I still want to debunk the common misconception that they're 'noob paints' and no serious painter would touch them. Whilst I may not be anywhere near Golden Daemon levels, I'd certainly consider myself to be a pretty damn decent painter, and I use Contrast paints a lot. Using translucent layers is simply a different technique, it is more like working with water colours. Now obviously I use normal paints in addition to them, but they're a valuable part of my toolkit. They also help speeding past the boring parts and getting to the more interesting detail work.
I probably wouldn't have started a new 40k army recently if not for Contrast to help speed up some of the rank & file units. Wish they'd been around before I painted 200 gaunts!
2021/09/02 21:59:14
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
H.B.M.C. wrote: drbored - I figured you took the time to write a detailed post, so the least I could do is take the time to reply in kind.
drbored wrote: I've been wondering about this sort of thing. A lot of people tend to make arguments about GW's path, the models that are coming out, etc, within the vacuum of GW's product line. Where there may be improvements to fidelity of detail, they are made via sacrifices to 'poseability', but then you look at the poseability of old, and you had a lot of marines and models that looked like this:
Sure, it was slightly easier to put the plasma gun, melta gun, flamer, and pistols on whichever arm you wanted, but for the most part those things are still possible with a little bit of extra effort and careful clipping, minus a few options where the hands are molded around the grip, for example. The ability to rotate the torso 360 degrees was paired with the issue of the legs always looking like they were in a mid-squat pose, while with the newer models, certain special and heavy weapons can only fit on one or two bodies, and only fit on others with significantly more effort than before.
I wholeheartedly reject this argument as it does not match up to the reality of GW minis. Above I have three links to not-exactly-old kits - Deathwatch Veterans, Rubric Marines and Mk.III Marines. I chose recent Marines examples specifically as previous Tactical Squads and the Chaos Marines you included in your post above are most often cited for why "this is why mono-pose is better!". None of those kits are dumpy bow-legged Marines like those ancient Chaos Marines (much as I love that old kit! ).
GW is at the top of their game when it comes to plastic multi-part miniatures. I cannot speak to what plasic tech in Japan is like - so please don't quote a dozen random Gundum makers at me that maybe make GW look like children* - but from a mass-market Western wargame I don't think anyone matches them as far as variety, detail and expertise. It's no accident why they're the biggest fish in the small pond that is miniature wargaming, and why other companies could never reach their heights (Mantic), why some need pre-painted pre-built licensed products to get near (X-Wing, SW Legion) or why some almost got there but flew too close to the sun (Privateer Press).
*That's directed at the thread, not you specifically.
We know what they can produce. How often have we all gone "Well I already own 20 of those, so I doubt a new kit will make me rebuy th... oh my God I must have that!!!" when they show off just how much more detail a new kit has, new weapons, new heads and really just how farwe'vecome?
GW's recent crop of minis may have the detail, but they're losing their modularity. They're becoming harder to piece together. They're becoming more restrictive. None of these three things are positive and, more importantly, none of these things are necessary because we know they don't have to do it this way.
I don't know how many different ways I can restate that, and I don't understand why anyone could see this regression as a positive. If you think this trend really is a positive, then by all means, help me understand it.
drbored wrote: The other angle that I have been considering this is in the community as a whole. With regards to mental health, if you're surrounded by people that are constantly negative, bashing on the things that you like, or at worst even gaslighting or using other argument methods to shut you down, many mental health experts would call that a toxic environment. A toxic environment isn't conducive to the healthy growth of an individual, and is generally not where you would want to be, and yet the Warhammer community, on some sites, is exactly that. "Relentless positivity" is hammered down until those that like to look on the bright side simply don't speak up, while "relentless negativity" is praised and joined, upvoted and agreed with, whether or not it's warranted, and sometimes in the face of opposing facts.
I operate on a credit where credit's due mentality. It's why you'll always see me talking up GW customer service, as it's excellent. It's why you'll see me absolutely gushing over virtually any terrain product GW puts out. But that also means I'm not going to ignore things I consider to be bad, from rules, to GW's pricing policies, business practices, to increasing amounts of mono-pose minis.
I don't think we have a problem with hammering down 'relentless positivity', because what I find is that we don't often get that here. What we get are relentless excuse making. When something is good, we see people in any thread in N&R talking about it. And I think Dakka's nature as a 'toxic' is overblown. Better this than a site where the staff stamp down on any form of discussion that doesn't fit its incredibly narrow views (I've heard horror stories about Bolter & Chainsword...). As far as the opposite, 'relentless negativity', I've come across very few here who exude that with every aspect of every post they make.
drbored wrote: I wouldn't call anyone pointing these things out to be 'relentlessly negative', though in many of these instances it certainly feels like they're beating the same horse, and new routes of conversation might be more entertaining to have.
You know? I don't disagree with you on that. But at the same time, mono-pose minis is this thread's topic, so whilst the topic itself may have been done to death, it seems odd to criticise the discussion happening within the thread where it was set up to happen.
drbored wrote: However, there are just as many criticisms that are stated as fact, and when someone tries to present an opposing view, the community doesn't want to hear it. Take Kill Team, for example. The volatile upset of the vocal part of the community was astoundingly negative when it was revealed that the Compendium would be a separate book and would cost more than the previous editions' core book did. Is that crappy? Yeah, it's rough to have to shell another 60 USD to get what people perceive to be the same content as what previously came in a 40 dollar book. Sure, I agree, that's mighty crappy. As I said before, I'm not a fan of the printing of so many books. That said, the same exact thing happened with Warhammer 40k and the community praised the practice: 8th edition brought with it the Indexes, and in order to be able to play all the factions, you had to buy 4 separate indexes, knowing full well that they'd be replaced later.
I don't have the Compendium, and Kill Team itself holds little interest for me (certainly once they decided to forgo numbers in favour of shapes for some unknown reason... ), but I think that came down to people expecting their Kill-Teams to be useable in the new rules, and not to have all their options stripped away. Y'know, a bit like when a new kit comes out and it's all mono-pose.
drbored wrote: When you talk about "relentless positivity" like it's a bad thing, I have to wonder if you'd prefer this "relentless negativity" to continue. Is it truly healthy for the community as a whole? Valid criticism, maybe even some activism to keep the company on track, is certainly healthy, but in my mind the negative voices seem to be far louder than the positive ones.
I have a quote in my sig - "Everything is fine, nothing is broken!" that I keep there for a very specific reason. It was something an old boss of mine would say years ago when everything was going wrong. It was his self-deprecating way of letting everyone know that something was broken but he was working on fixing it. When the time came to do the vehicle rules for the Only War 40KRPG I couldn't help but include that as the quote at the start of the vehicle repair section, which is where that screenshot in my sig comes from.
As I said above, I don't feel we have a lot of "relentless positivity" at Dakka - certainly no more than relentless negativity - but rather relentless excuse making. Too many people here are willing to go "Everything is fine! Nothing is broken!" whilst things regress right before their eyes. That's not positivity. That's delusion.
When GW gets something right, we should celebrate it - the new Ork terrain is phenomenal, I really love the new 1KSons Codex, I think Crusade is fantastic (but would be better if my 'Nids had Crusade rules! ). The Indomitus box finally turned me around on Primaris Marines (dumb Cawl fluff notwithstanding). Blackstone Fortress and Cursed City are two of the coolest things GW has released in a long time. 8th (and 9th) made me excited to play 40k again. I quite often express the sheer joy I get out of terrain making, even with my own blog on the subject. I just want to play 40K and Necromunda and Warhammer Quest and BattleTech but I've been stuck in a perpetual lockdown since June and it's driving me fething insane!!!
*ahem*
Meanwhile, Al, a few posts above me: "Those aren't real conversions! Real conversions involve blah blah blah gatekeeping!"
And ---I'm--- the one being negative?
drbored wrote: Also, don't mistake "relentless positivity" for people that just want to enjoy the hobby they spent hundreds of dollars to get into. There are people that, despite the beliefs in some of these forums, actually LIKE the hobby for what it is, despite the drama, and don't need to be told that so many things suck.
Completely fair call, but I can't help but point out again that this is a thread about mono-pose minis, so coming in here not expecting to find opinions in the negative of such minis is a bit like going into a discussion about a new movie you haven't seen and getting annoyed that they "spoiled" it for you.
I'm not as savvy with the quote system so I'll just respond to a few points.
I DEFINITELY took the conversation off the rails, mostly because I had an ulterior motive when it came to creating this topic, which was to gauge certain emotions of the forum under the guise of a thought exercise. In my mind, certain complaints that are purely in the realm of opinion tend to, when people discuss them in comments, veer towards the negative, but as you can see from the poll above, there's generally a larger number of people that would continue to buy into the hobby as it is, and as it could be. I don't at all feel 'spoiled' about a certain range of opinions. In fact, I'm seeing a lot of what I'd expect.
My own brainspace has been a bit tumultuous. Dealing with negativity in my own local community has driven me away from that community, but not from the hobby. As I actively build and paint my models, I find myself enjoying the hobby, while I tend to not enjoy time spent talking about the hobby. Much more breath is spent complaining about a variety of issues, from 'what is monopose' to 'is this tolerable' to 'everything is awful all the time' than it is on conversation focused on the lighter side. There are of course a couple points to be made there alone.
A. People in general tend to find some catharsis complaining, whinging, and griping about issues in their lives and circles.
B. Progress on the Warhammer hobby is generally slow. In the span of a week, a hobbyist may make a little bit of progress on a squad, or play one or two games. In other words, conversations on the positive aspects of the hobby are simply fewer, and the void in between those conversations is filled with whatever topics may be at hand, which tends to be some form of GW drama. I more blame our need to consume social media to fill that void as the issue, but I'm sure it differs from person to person.
As to the "relentless excuse making" I think that's a matter of perspective when it comes to the nature of opinions. In regards to the mono-pose issue, there's certainly a challenge when some bodies within a model kit can't be easily equipped with certain special weapons. The Chaos Marine Missile Launcher is an example that pops to mind, since I built it recently. On some of the bodies, especially the running ones, but also some of the regular standing ones, the missile launcher arm simply... struggles to fit on many of the bodies, or looks quite awkward indeed. On one or two out of the 10 bodies, it works decently well, and out of maybe another one or two, you could shave some plastic away to make it work well enough, but it's still pretty clear that it's meant to fit in a certain way on those first two body options.
Someone who likes the kit regardless might say a variety of things, like "You don't need that many missile launchers anyway!" or "just get the Havoc set, and use some of those as missile launchers instead!" which misses the point of having options in the first kit completely. These excuses, I think, come from the same sort of emotion as someone trying to swat a fly away with their hand and missing. They send out excuses hoping that one of them will strike true and the opponents of the model kit will shut up with all of their "relentless negativity" and go away, or somehow change their mind and see the light (we all know that nobody changes their mind on the Internet).
Meanwhile, someone that doesn't like the kit for the aforementioned reasons will suggest "GW can do better!" or "The range of options is worst than other kits of the past and present!" But what I've found is that instead of pointing people to the source, many will often use highly aggressive and derisive language to describe the issue, with your choice of curse words or colorful language sprinkled in for flavor. This makes the person arguing for a better model kit seem simply grumpy and inconsolable, likely because they've dealt with too many of the excuse-makers and know that anything else would land on deaf ears. There's another issue, however. The issue is simply that, well, the model kit is out. By the time it's revealed by GW, there's little say that we have in what we get. The legitimate complaints that we may have about models that are coming out today may not actually go into effect in the cycle of design-and-release for another 3-5 years, and even then it's very unlikely that GW will remake a modern kit to appease complainers or those that want more options in their kit. Because of these things, complaints tend to pile up even though fans of a particular kit or faction are buying it up anyway.
In either situation, you've got opposing views that will never meet eye-to-eye unless opinions change (which they do, contrary to my previous statement. My own have changed several times over the course of my hobbying, as I've gone from my 20's into my 30's even here on this very forum. It tends to take a decent measure of self reflecting, life events, and various catalysts, like GW suggesting you can slap the old resin sonic blasters on new chaos marines to make Emperor's Children Noise Marines, instead of giving us a fething Noise Marine update, ffs).
The result: a forum where people argue, where those with one kind of opinion view the other side as toxic. A forum can choose the course it takes, as Bolter and Chainsword clearly wanted to foster a more pro-GW attitude, which, honestly, I appreciate. It's nice to have a place I know I can go to where I can read a thread and not have to deal with these arguments, especially when so many other places people are free to complain to their hearts content. Having different communities can be healthy for the Community as a whole, as people can find the cliques they fit in with and won't feel forced to stick with certain attitudes around them at all times.
When I was younger, I lived in a town with only one game store. If you wanted to play anything, from 40k to Magic the Gathering, you went to that game store. If you didn't like someone, you had to play nice, because there were simply no other options. Now, I live in a place with twelve game stores, and the ability to fit in with a certain group that matches your opinions/playstyles is a blessing. You're not stuck losing game after game with your narrative army against a group of competitive players, you can go find the other narrative players and have a better time. In my mind it's better to be able to find a place where you can fit in, so where someone might say that a forum like B&C is 'restricting of free speech', I see it as a save haven for people that just want to have fun with their miniatures that they spent hundreds of dollars on without being in a community that's more likely to give them feelings of buyer's remorse.
My personal hope, honestly, is not to change anyone's opinions about the validity of the current path of GW's model making or business decisions. I actually have much more fun trying to figure out the root cause of people's butting of heads, even when it's my own head being butted against. I have no great dreams of changing the community, but if I can figure out my own viewpoints through conversation, either personally or online, then I can better direct my energy into what's actually important to me. It was this sort of thing, butting of heads included, that got me to leave one community in my local area in favor of another. So, hopefully I'll just have a better time. I'd hope that more people try to do that, to improve their situation if it needs improving, and that includes considering why you get so much catharsis over complaining, or if your excuse-making is falling on deaf ears, or anywhere in between.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/02 21:59:48
2021/09/02 22:11:36
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
ERJAK wrote: Contrast is basically magic for bad painters.
I am a bad painter. I've been a bad painter for almost a decade now. It's very likely I will always be a bad painter. The 'most well crafted army I could manage' pre-contrast just straight up isn't as good as what I can achieve now with a metallic airbrush basecoat and some Talassar blue or Blood Angel red.
It's not a trend towards convenience, the desire for more convenience has always been there, especially with painting. It's also not the only thing products like contrast and 'How to paint an army in one day' offer. For YOU(in your elitist mindset, and yes, it is quite clearly elitist) these products represent a dip in quality or a dumbing down of hobby, but for new players, gamers, or people who just aren't good at the painting side, they represent an increase in convenience AND quality.
Painting keeps more people out of the hobby than anything else. More than price(although price is a close #2 and loses out when you net players gained BY painting), more than rules, more than bad community experiences. It is unbelievably daunting for new players to jump into. Things like Contrast and quick paint videos help make the entire process seem less impossible to people who aren't familiar with miniature painting.
Yeah, making painting more accessible is great and the Contrast paints are very good for that.
But I still want to debunk the common misconception that they're 'noob paints' and no serious painter would touch them. Whilst I may not be anywhere near Golden Daemon levels, I'd certainly consider myself to be a pretty damn decent painter, and I use Contrast paints a lot. Using translucent layers is simply a different technique, it is more like working with water colours. Now obviously I use normal paints in addition to them, but they're a valuable part of my toolkit. They also help speeding past the boring parts and getting to the more interesting detail work.
A "Contrast Paint" is a glaze. That's it. That's all it is. You can glaze with "Contrast Paints", you can glaze without "Contrast Paints." They take a technique that already exists and made it a bit easier for inexperienced painters to use it, and there's no reason experienced painters looking to speed up their process shouldn't use them, but it's an element in your toolkit whether or not you decide to use "Contrast Paints" to do it.
A "Contrast Paint" is a glaze. That's it. That's all it is. You can glaze with "Contrast Paints", you can glaze without "Contrast Paints." They take a technique that already exists and made it a bit easier for inexperienced painters to use it, and there's no reason experienced painters looking to speed up their process shouldn't use them, but it's an element in your toolkit whether or not you decide to use "Contrast Paints" to do it.
Sure. It is a type of glaze. Though it has somewhat different flow properties than more typical glaze. It is something between a wash and a glaze.
But with the old models the abdomen looked wrong if you rotated the torso.
Well that's plainly untrue. I mean there's a range for how much you can rotate the torso (obviously you can't rotate it backwards), but there's way more range there than you're giving credit for.
ERJAK wrote: Contrast is basically magic for bad painters.
I am a bad painter. I've been a bad painter for almost a decade now. It's very likely I will always be a bad painter. The 'most well crafted army I could manage' pre-contrast just straight up isn't as good as what I can achieve now with a metallic airbrush basecoat and some Talassar blue or Blood Angel red.
It's not a trend towards convenience, the desire for more convenience has always been there, especially with painting. It's also not the only thing products like contrast and 'How to paint an army in one day' offer. For YOU(in your elitist mindset, and yes, it is quite clearly elitist) these products represent a dip in quality or a dumbing down of hobby, but for new players, gamers, or people who just aren't good at the painting side, they represent an increase in convenience AND quality.
Painting keeps more people out of the hobby than anything else. More than price(although price is a close #2 and loses out when you net players gained BY painting), more than rules, more than bad community experiences. It is unbelievably daunting for new players to jump into. Things like Contrast and quick paint videos help make the entire process seem less impossible to people who aren't familiar with miniature painting.
Yeah, making painting more accessible is great and the Contrast paints are very good for that.
But I still want to debunk the common misconception that they're 'noob paints' and no serious painter would touch them. Whilst I may not be anywhere near Golden Daemon levels, I'd certainly consider myself to be a pretty damn decent painter, and I use Contrast paints a lot. Using translucent layers is simply a different technique, it is more like working with water colours. Now obviously I use normal paints in addition to them, but they're a valuable part of my toolkit. They also help speeding past the boring parts and getting to the more interesting detail work.
A "Contrast Paint" is a glaze. That's it. That's all it is. You can glaze with "Contrast Paints", you can glaze without "Contrast Paints." They take a technique that already exists and made it a bit easier for inexperienced painters to use it, and there's no reason experienced painters looking to speed up their process shouldn't use them, but it's an element in your toolkit whether or not you decide to use "Contrast Paints" to do it.
Unless you can't glaze without contrast paints. I can't. No goddam idea how that crap works. Watched a bunch of guide videos on glazing, still always ends up looking like I spilled paint water on whatever I was working on.
So I just use contrast paints instead. Much better. I imagine it's the same for a lot of people who pick up the brush for the first time. Or who hate painting.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/02 22:28:49
2021/09/02 22:33:49
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
But with the old models the abdomen looked wrong if you rotated the torso.
Well that's plainly untrue. I mean there's a range for how much you can rotate the torso (obviously you can't rotate it backwards), but there's way more range there than you're giving credit for.
The old marines have a belt buckle and usually some cables going directly upwards from it as part of their torso. Realistically if the marine turned their torso, the belt buckle would move less than the chest, and the cables would bent. Now of course as this one piece, this cannot happen, so it looks wrong. On primaris marines the abdomen details are actually sculpted to match the rotation of the torso, so they look right.
I think contrast paints are definitely nice if you're looking to paint a lot of rank and file models without spending ages on each.
Even if you add some detail or extra layers afterwards, painting the bulk of a model's body with a contrast paint can save an awful lot of time and effort.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
2021/09/02 22:37:59
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
But with the old models the abdomen looked wrong if you rotated the torso.
Well that's plainly untrue. I mean there's a range for how much you can rotate the torso (obviously you can't rotate it backwards), but there's way more range there than you're giving credit for.
The old marines have a belt buckle and usually some cables going directly upwards from it as part of their torso. Realistically if the marine turned their torso, the belt buckle would move less than the chest, and the cables would bent. Now of course as this one piece, this cannot happen, so it looks wrong. On primaris marines the abdomen details are actually sculpted to match the rotation of the torso, so they look right.
Let's be real. The old marines never looked right. Bowlegged and with thighs out of an Anorexia clinic.
2021/09/02 22:44:20
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
Let's be real. The old marines never looked right. Bowlegged and with thighs out of an Anorexia clinic.
Tell me about it! I spent so much time rescaling a reposing them for my previous marine army in attempt to get them look right. I am so glad that we finally have marine models that have decent looking anatomy straight from the box, so I can spent my conversion efforts on more fun stuff than fixing proportions.
But with the old models the abdomen looked wrong if you rotated the torso.
Well that's plainly untrue. I mean there's a range for how much you can rotate the torso (obviously you can't rotate it backwards), but there's way more range there than you're giving credit for.
The old marines have a belt buckle and usually some cables going directly upwards from it as part of their torso. Realistically if the marine turned their torso, the belt buckle would move less than the chest, and the cables would bent. Now of course as this one piece, this cannot happen, so it looks wrong. On primaris marines the abdomen details are actually sculpted to match the rotation of the torso, so they look right.
A detail I'm happy to give up for the sake of making my own poses.
Insectum7 wrote: Looked right enough to be GWs best selling models for three decades.
And Toby Macguire was an awesome Spiderman until Tom Holland knocked it out of the park. Will I still enjoy the original movies? Sure, but I like the new ones so much more. This is, of course, just my personal opinion.
2021/09/02 23:19:26
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
For me, combined torsos and legs (If you can make it with the option of havin different breastplates for each body even better) and nearly total freedom of heads, shoulderpads and arms and weapons is the best way of doing this.
And TBH, Intercessors are basically that. Heck, I made my Assault Intercessor sargeants with Indomitus marines using the double handed Deatwatch thunder hammer with minimal effort, just using the pauldrons to hide where the smallers arm's don't connect 100% with the body.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2021/09/02 23:26:26
Subject: If EVERY GW Release from Now to Forever was Monopose...
The 2019 Chaos Knights I am currently assembling are probably the worst GW plastic kit I have ever worked with. This thing is just atrocious - every single knight is cut up differently from every other one, in completely bizarre and non-intuitive ways that make the idea of painting in assemblies virtually impossible, so you have to just stick them together and content yourself with the hard to reach bits not getting done well. And don't even think about trying to repose them.
And despite all that...the kit doesn't even go together well, either. I've had to use more green stuff on this than on any other plastic kit I've ever put together according to the basic instructions, bar none. Nothing fits together right - it's almost like chopping figures up into absolutely bizarre bits doesn't work very well when trying to fit them back together.
I cannot say enough bad things about this kit. It is everything wrong with modern GW. And the absolutely astounding thing is that this is from a Start Collecting box. If I had started the hobby with this box, I am quite sure I would have quit out of sheer frustration and never come back. It's mind-boggling that anyone thought it was a good idea to design a starter set with miniatures assembled like these ones are.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/02 23:36:16
Obviously swapping a primaris legs onto a normal marine chest might look off... XD But still there is some benefit to being able to rotate/tilt the torso a bit when making the pose of your model.
).
), but I think that came down to people expecting their Kill-Teams to be useable in the new rules, and not to have all their options stripped away. Y'know, a bit like when a new kit comes out and it's all mono-pose. 
