Karol wrote:
Plus I must say I have seen a guy at my store make cutodes with the big guns, out of different stormcast models and stuff he designed and printed himself. The models are 100% monopose, and look , at least just as good, as what GW did with FW.

I don't sometimes I think people, just know when something is not okey. A unit of havocks looking all the same is okey. But if someone told me they have a unit of 30 identical looking cultists, I don't think it would look good. And the stuff other mentioned about too dynamic stuff is, I think true too. It just loks wierd when every 5th model, army does a very distinct specific thing. And it gets really bad for certain armies. For other , like nids, it doesn't hurt as much.

 the_scotsman wrote:


Simple as that. Don't complain about any flaws in that system or that's politics.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
No criticism allowed!

Spoiler:

https://thenib.com/mister-gotcha/

Goose LeChance wrote:
You meme post constantly, including in this thread so it's par for the course.

Andykp wrote:

drbored wrote:

Spoiler:

 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 far we've come?

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 40K RPG 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.

Spoiler:

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.

Love the fact everyone just ignored this. Too busy enjoying being negative and having a row to actual see what’s happening here.

The Newman wrote:

Which is a shame since its certainly the more interesting discussion.

Goose LeChance wrote:

The Newman wrote:

Which is a shame since its certainly the more interesting discussion.

Is it?

 the_scotsman wrote:
Drbored: "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."

Yup, this, basically. That's kind of what 'memeification' is. Everything is hyperbolized and shortened to the point of complete meaninglessness in an attempt to pre-emptively win an argument by forcing people into the position where it appears like they're arguing for something bonkers.

I'll pick exclusively on myself to avoid getting peoples' hackles up here: I make fun of Primaris unit names a lot, because it's a shorthand for the things that actually annoy me about most primaris units (their superficiality, the special treatment GW gives their heavy consumer marine playerbase over every other faction instead of enforcing faction release parity like a lot of game systems like MTG PP etc do or at least make less obvious, the releasing of new units that could not be more clearly replacements for existing units but which are purposefully designed to not *quite* be compatible so you have to buy the new one, GW blatantly reusing common concepts and slightly reconfiguring the spelling like some unholy fusion of a shity modern corporation and a millennial mother naming their babies, etc)

But that shorthand is just like, objectively hyperbole. There is no meaningful distinction in 'name quality' between "Eradicators" and "Devastators." There just isn't. "Infiltrators", "Outriders", "Suppressors", "Redemptor Dreadnought", "Invictor Warsuit" , and "Bladeguard Veterans", are perfectly fine, reasonable names for science fiction military units perfectly in line with "Sentinel", "Tactical Squad", "Assault Terminators", "Penitent Engine" and various things that we are more accepting of because theyve been around forever and when we first encountered them we were younger and more likely to go "woaaaaoooooh COOOOOOL' than think they were cheesy cringe.

Vatsetis wrote:
Dont put the burden on the costumers ("whales"), Adam Smith wouldnt do it.

 Dysartes wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:
Dont put the burden on the costumers ("whales"), Adam Smith wouldnt do it.

Quick FYI - customers buy products, costumers make costumes...

Sorry, but I see this one frequently (not just from you) and it bugs me, for some reason.

Tyel wrote:
As people have said, I feel the definition of monopose is really being pushed.

To my mind monopose is the old metal or single-printed plastics of the 1990s era. Intercessors certainly didn't feel monopose when I put 10 together a few years back. The same for basic CSM.

I think the lack of options in kits is bad - perhaps most especially in character kits, given the ever inflated price GW charge for them.

But... yeah. I just don't find the fact every fifth "X" is holding its weapons "like this" annoying in the way it seems to bother other people. Maybe its due to running goblin armies with 50+ essential clones in a unit.

Vatsetis wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:
Dont put the burden on the costumers ("whales"), Adam Smith wouldnt do it.

Quick FYI - customers buy products, costumers make costumes...

Sorry, but I see this one frequently (not just from you) and it bugs me, for some reason.

Well it can bug you... But is almost a truism that outside a perfect competition market (and the "warhammer hobby" is certainly not one) the power of costumers is extremely limited.

Corporate Workshop couldnt do a tenth of his bad practices if its costumers had any significant power.

The fact that costumers are routinely framed as those ultimately guilty of corporate abuse when they are one of the main victims is just another aspect of their lack of power or real agency in the market place.

 Galas wrote:
The Havoc kit is just a bad kit. His bitz and sprue density looks like something from 12-15 years ago.

yukishiro1 wrote:

There's a much better argument for kits like the Thralls than like the Chaos Knights, IMO. The Thralls achieve a level of fluid movement that the old multipart kits never do, while still preserving the ability to create more than 10 different-looking models through arm and head swaps.

 the_scotsman wrote:
... highly customizable primaris kits...

 Galas wrote:
I cannot say. Maybe the armies were designed under different philosopies? Maybe the sculptors of the slaangors were just worse, incapable of using better the sprue space assigned to them?

The Newman wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:
Dont put the burden on the costumers ("whales"), Adam Smith wouldnt do it.

Quick FYI - customers buy products, costumers make costumes...

Sorry, but I see this one frequently (not just from you) and it bugs me, for some reason.

Well it can bug you... But is almost a truism that outside a perfect competition market (and the "warhammer hobby" is certainly not one) the power of costumers is extremely limited.

Corporate Workshop couldnt do a tenth of his bad practices if its costumers had any significant power.

The fact that costumers are routinely framed as those ultimately guilty of corporate abuse when they are one of the main victims is just another aspect of their lack of power or real agency in the market place.

I'm sorry, but what the heck does any of that have to do with saying "costumers" when you obviously mean "customers"? "People using the wrong word here bugs me" is in no way an argument for or against your position, say "yeah, I meant 'customer', sorry about your pet peeve there" and move on.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
The Havoc kit is just a bad kit. His bitz and sprue density looks like something from 12-15 years ago.

One chaincannon. That's all I'm going to say. One. . CHAINCANNON.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That's... not an equivalent example. What people are doing here, to take your Spider-Man example, is basically "Well, now that I see Tom Holland, I see that Toby Macguire's Spider-Man was poorly acted and unconvincing. He really wasn't very good at the time, was he?" (and it would be as terrible an argument as the outdated bowlegged Marine example). That's what people are saying when they say that the new mono-pose minis are great.

Tyel wrote:
As people have said, I feel the definition of monopose is really being pushed.

To my mind monopose is the old metal or single-printed plastics of the 1990s era. Intercessors certainly didn't feel monopose when I put 10 together a few years back. The same for basic CSM.

I think the lack of options in kits is bad - perhaps most especially in character kits, given the ever inflated price GW charge for them.

But... yeah. I just don't find the fact every fifth "X" is holding its weapons "like this" annoying in the way it seems to bother other people. Maybe its due to running goblin armies with 50+ essential clones in a unit.