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.

Well we are going to see new Karskin quite soon. New Kill Team set is coming up pre-order next week!

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:





Some more pictures of the Kasrkins. Of interest, to me, at least, is the cable-less Hotshot-Sniper

So we already know the unit entry. One model can have a Plasma Gun, one model can have a Grenade Launcher, and one model can have a Sniper Rifle.

Brilliant rules.

On stream they said two guys could have each.

 Gert wrote:
Why is the number of poses that big a deal for an army where you're supposed to be running masses of things? Of all the units to be dynamic for every single model, Guardsmen are not what jumps to the top of the list IMO.
Space Marines, sure you don't get a lot of them in an army and similar poses are sometimes noticeable but also pretty easy to sort cos, Bitz. But Guardsmen are the faceless masses that look the same as their 80 other comrades because individuality doesn't matter when you are a little better than a number with a gun.

In b4 "but when you have two guys in exactly the same dynamic pose then you notice them more" mental gymnastics.

 Albertorius wrote:

 Gert wrote:
So what I'm hearing is that if your opponent is putting down 80 Guardsmen, 3 HWT, 4 Russes, 2 Chimeras, a Basilisk, 2 Commanders and a Commisar, that it will irritate you that every one in every 20 models will have a similar pose?

What I'm hearing is you trying to ridicule and belittle people who have issues with that.

But no, it's seeing the same ten bodies in the same ten poses eight times in the army. Even if you change the arms and the head, it's usually noticeable enough, and the more noticeable the more "out there" the poses are.

Some opinions are deserving of ridicule. You're entitle to have opinions, you're not entitled to have those opinions treated fairly or respected.

 Irbis wrote:

JWBS wrote:
I too wish that they were multipose, like the old Cadians, and indeed all kits of yesteryear.

Ah, yes, ""all"" MuLtiPoSe kits of yesteryear, just look at the variation here:

Careful, you might make someone angry by shattering their rose-tinted nostalgia goggles. This is where the "repetitive dynamic posing stands out too much" defense came from. The moment someone pointed out that in the past 60% of models in any given unit were basically identical they had to jump from "the models are all the same" to "well I don't mind if they are all the same as long as they are all in a boring bland pose with no character".


Personally, new Cadians are ace, all of them. I never cared for Cadians before, I will be buying them in droves.

well, back in the bast of the original GW monopose plastics, those were accepted because they were cheap

metal looked better, but was more expensive

now the plastics are more expensive than the metal ones and the only defence is "monopose was always normal, it does not matter"

no problem with those if they were cheap, but for a premium price I want a premium product and having double bodies in a unit of 10 is not worth a premium price
simple as that

if you think those are worth your money, do it, but they are not worth mine as long as I can get similar or better for less

 kodos wrote:
well, back in the bast of the original GW monopose plastics, those were accepted because they were cheap

metal looked better, but was more expensive

now the plastics are more expensive than the metal ones and the only defence is "monopose was always normal, it does not matter"

no problem with those if they were cheap, but for a premium price I want a premium product and having double bodies in a unit of 10 is not worth a premium price
simple as that

if you think those are worth your money, do it, but they are not worth mine as long as I can get similar or better for less

Basically this, yes. And nowadays, I can choose between literal thousands of 3d designs to print for peanuts, even counting the costs of the files. And at worst I'll have the same issue of repeated poses. But for a fraction of the price.

But mostly I really don't like the aesthetic of the new Cadians in general, so I'm a happy camper with my currently owned 300 IGs without needing to buy any of these.

Still, glad for the people that do like them.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Pyroalchi wrote:
Personally I think the Cadians look nice, although the kneecaps... do look a bit weird.

It's so weird to me that this is a complaint. Not trying to single you out specifically Pyro, just you're the most recent one to voice it.

It's an incredibly common feature in a lot of tactical uniforms here in the US...but maybe that's why it feels so weird to me as a complaint, since it's relatively commonplace to see?
[...]

Fair enough. Maybe it has something to do with how they are painted. Somehow when I think of kneepads in the sense of something that is there to protect the knee I would expect it to be... bigger and really cover it. But I just googled a bit how military pants with kneepads look like at the moment and my expectation just seemed to be wrong.

I think the part that weirds me out the most about the new sculpts, now that I think about it, is the cloth necks of the uniform. Not only they are ginormous, but completely rigid. And of course, being that big contrast weirdly with the heads, that are now quite undersized, particularly the helmets.

 Albertorius wrote:
I think the part that weirds me out the most about the new sculpts, now that I think about it, is the cloth necks of the uniform. Not only they are ginormous, but completely rigid. And of course, being that big contrast weirdly with the heads, that are now quite undersized, particularly the helmets.

I find the black... chin strap thing, I guess, that covers the lower jaw really weird. I don't mind the rigid collar. I don't know if I'd gone with a high neck for the shirt, but okay. But instead of a normal strap they have that weirdly shaped thing that doesn't just cover part of the face but seems to extend under the jaw as well? Except at the same time the flamer dude with the covered face has a normal strap on his helmet. And is the black thing part of the shirt? A hood, as the sergeant with the cap suggests? But why do some have padded chins and others don't? I don't know what that is all about, but I don't particularly care for it.

And I say that as someone who likes the new look overall.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

JWBS wrote:
I too wish that they were multipose, like the old Cadians, and indeed all kits of yesteryear.

Ah, yes, ""all"" MuLtiPoSe kits of yesteryear, just look at the variation here:

Careful, you might make someone angry by shattering their rose-tinted nostalgia goggles. This is where the "repetitive dynamic posing stands out too much" defense came from. The moment someone pointed out that in the past 60% of models in any given unit were basically identical they had to jump from "the models are all the same" to "well I don't mind if they are all the same as long as they are all in a boring bland pose with no character".


Personally, new Cadians are ace, all of them. I never cared for Cadians before, I will be buying them in droves.

Looks as though an obviously insincere statement has somehow been mistaken as earnest. How comical.

 Geifer wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
I think the part that weirds me out the most about the new sculpts, now that I think about it, is the cloth necks of the uniform. Not only they are ginormous, but completely rigid. And of course, being that big contrast weirdly with the heads, that are now quite undersized, particularly the helmets.

I find the black... chin strap thing, I guess, that covers the lower jaw really weird.

I'll help: they look weird on guardsmen because they have been a Tau thing so far.

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
I think the part that weirds me out the most about the new sculpts, now that I think about it, is the cloth necks of the uniform. Not only they are ginormous, but completely rigid. And of course, being that big contrast weirdly with the heads, that are now quite undersized, particularly the helmets.

I find the black... chin strap thing, I guess, that covers the lower jaw really weird.

I'll help: they look weird on guardsmen because they have been a Tau thing so far.

That's certainly true. It's part of why I wonder how that particular fashion trend has found its way to Cadia. Is there some real life counterpart to it which GW copied? If not, it's all kinds of weird that they dropped the classic look for something that's already taken by a Xenos faction.

 Geifer wrote:
Is there some real life counterpart to it which GW copied? If not, it's all kinds of weird that they dropped the classic look for something that's already taken by a Xenos faction.

The Tau has it because that's where the fire warrior helmet slots in at the bottom of the Tau's face. Otherwise, it is a kind of uncommon sci-fi gear piece. Some of the rebel soldiers on Hoth also had them in Star Wars but AFAIK it is mostly associated with cyberpunk character design.

 Geifer wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:
I think the part that weirds me out the most about the new sculpts, now that I think about it, is the cloth necks of the uniform. Not only they are ginormous, but completely rigid. And of course, being that big contrast weirdly with the heads, that are now quite undersized, particularly the helmets.

I find the black... chin strap thing, I guess, that covers the lower jaw really weird.

I'll help: they look weird on guardsmen because they have been a Tau thing so far.

That's certainly true. It's part of why I wonder how that particular fashion trend has found its way to Cadia. Is there some real life counterpart to it which GW copied?

Yeah. A non-sci-fi version was popular in WW2 with Panzergrenadiers. They also had helmets similar to some of those that come with the new Cadians, camo and all.

Scorpionee wrote:
[
Yeah. A non-sci-fi version was popular in WW2 with Panzergrenadiers.

That's a different piece of clothing. It is a long tube-like scarf one could pull over their head like this. As far as I'm aware, that gear piece on the Cadians has no real-life equivalent at all.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 Gert wrote:
So what I'm hearing is that if your opponent is putting down 80 Guardsmen, 3 HWT, 4 Russes, 2 Chimeras, a Basilisk, 2 Commanders and a Commisar, that it will irritate you that every one in every 20 models will have a similar pose?

What I'm hearing is you trying to ridicule and belittle people who have issues with that.

But no, it's seeing the same ten bodies in the same ten poses eight times in the army. Even if you change the arms and the head, it's usually noticeable enough, and the more noticeable the more "out there" the poses are.

The old kit had five leg poses, the torsos looked stupid if rotated more than a micron, and the clumpy rifles waving in odd directions is the only real choice. This kit seems like a flat upgrade for variety.

 Crimson wrote:

This. The only element of customisation the new models will lack is the possibility of turning the torso a tiny bit, but as there will actually be more different bodies, you will get more variety and the poses actually look natural. I'm sure you can freely put any arms on any body. The complaints (as usual) are completely ridiculous.

 Irbis wrote:

Really, the new ""monopose"" SM/IG produce way more varied poses and miniatures with alt builds than any MuLtiPoSe kit ever could. I especially like whining about legs, when these actually connect to the torso in organic, fluid way (not to mention don't lack half of the spine like most MuLtiPoSe kits) and old boxes mostly contained nearly identical leg sets that looked comical if you didn't glue them to torso in a single, very precise way that produced clones looking nowhere near as good as new bodies.

Really, new Primaris kits (that glue very precisely into natural, very nice mini but can also be easily converted if you cut small tab revealing socket below) are best of both worlds. After building 10 of old supposedly MuLtiPoSe terminators mixed with DA bits (activity that should be mandatory for everyone claiming old models could produce any varied/good poses or were easy to convert) I have no idea how anyone can want to go back to old, gak ways of doing stuff...

chaos0xomega wrote:


Careful, you might make someone angry by shattering their rose-tinted nostalgia goggles. This is where the "repetitive dynamic posing stands out too much" defense came from. The moment someone pointed out that in the past 60% of models in any given unit were basically identical they had to jump from "the models are all the same" to "well I don't mind if they are all the same as long as they are all in a boring bland pose with no character".

Alllll truuuue. I'm glad people are pushing back at the "poseability" freaks with observations like this.

It's wild that people are so un-self-reflective that they can look back on that 3rd/4th ish era of kits and delude themselves into thinking they were generating, like, creative poses that didn't repeat through an army and made every model unique, when in actuality they were repeating generic, widespread posing "choices" and ending up with models that looked the same as everybody else's (and ugly as hell whenever the limits of the models' poseability were pushed even slightly). These people are in love with the feeling they had while assembling the models (often in their youth or childhood) and not the actual results that were produced.

And you can still get that feeling, you just need to learn to chop up, file down, bend, extend, etc. plastic kits. Yet some people just want lazy adult Lego.

As a general reminder to the thread: It's possible to disagree with someone's opinion without being rude about it. Let's give it a try from here on out, hmm?

Repeated poses aren't really an issue, it's when the poses are all extremely dynamic, so repeats end up an eyesore. New Ork Boyz are that for me.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
Repeated poses aren't really an issue, it's when the poses are all extremely dynamic, so repeats end up an eyesore. New Ork Boyz are that for me.

It won't matter that you say this. As it hasn't mattered any of the other five hundred times it's been said. People just wanna earn internet points, facts be damned.

So we've reached the height of dishonesty now, just flat out pretending that models in the past weren't multipose and that the minis we have today are no different at all to what came before.

Terrific.

Multipose lol

Continue being blatantly dishonest. Totally fine by me.

I like the kasrkin and cadians, judging by lining an old cadian up to my screen till his base only just obscures that of these guys they are the same heigh, just slimmed down to something approaching actual human dimensions. I like the M14 style lasguns. I think the heavier breaching armour/additional flak armour on the killteam guy is an interesting addition for the kasrkins, certainly a specialist item.
I am personally not too woried about static posing. That is what a good model saw, a sharp knife and green stuff is for.

I do not mind the look of the new armoured sentinel, but i do much prefer the older one. Its still much more of a recon vehicle, and sentinels do not have the best armour.

The artillery is an interesting idea. Seems to be some kind of battle cannon(really hope its not their idea of an auto cannon lol) the rocket launcher is not in my taste, and the singular las cannon is pissant on that heavy duty carriage. Especially when you consider something like a rapier laser destroyer and its comparative size and firepower.

Finally gives you something you can slap a russ battle cannon or vanquisher on and call an AT gun which i cannot argue with. Now we just need a little plastic something to tow it:
A certain OOP resin tracked vehicle named for a half man half horse being of greek mythology comes quickly to mind...

Alternatively you could kitbash it with a taurox or chimera in an attempt to make an WW2 style light tank hunter or infantry support vehicle. Like the US M3 GMC or up gunned German half tracks and 8x8 armoured cars.

It boggles the mind that someone would defend cut-apart CAD components with no pose potential. Over separate modular components, when it comes to a plastic kit.

The hobby as a whole, GW or otherwise wins when a multi-part kit is released. But, then again if a company thinks THEY ARE IT, why make something that any hobbyist could use?

JWBS wrote:
Multipose lol

You can combine any of those leg pieces with any of those chests, any head and any pair of arms. You can rotate and position them yourself without problem too. If that isn't multi-pose then just what definition of that are you using? Because if those don't count with that degree, then that means nothing should.

I mean, yeah, the fact that the studio has chosen to assemble them in very similar poses doesn't change the part breakdown, or the versatility it provides.

Ultimately, whether or not a slight rotation of the torso or a slight repositioning of the arms is enough to stop the models from all looking like clones of each other is going to come down to personal opinion and whether or not you personally notice those fine details. But acting like it's an absurd thing to want because you personally don't care is an odd take.

It's probably time to stop having this same discussion with every new GW release, though. They're very firmly on the 'Pretty, dynamic models take precedence over modeling versatility' path at the moment, and that's unlikely to change so long as the models keep selling.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
Repeated poses aren't really an issue, it's when the poses are all extremely dynamic, so repeats end up an eyesore. New Ork Boyz are that for me.

Repeats don't bother me in the slightest and I hardly notice them. The only thing I dislike about the new Ork Boyz kit is the fact that the weapon options are limited and you can't build a uniform unit loadout out of a single box.

It's probably time to stop having this same discussion with every new GW release, though. They're very firmly on the 'Pretty, dynamic models take precedence over modeling versatility' path at the moment, and that's unlikely to change so long as the models keep selling.

This. Personally I will always prefer pretty and dynamic poses over a bucket-load of humdrum sculpts that have been aesthetically comprimised over the need to try to create "modularity" which only ends up resulting in 60-80% of your minis basically looking identical with only minor variations of angle of weapon, head, and torso to differentiate them.

I hate pretty and dynamic poses for my wargame miniatures. I prefer they look like they're all doing stuff that makes sense for a fight, like running, holding their guns, et cetera. But it comes down to a matter of taste. I won't buy most HQ minis Warhammer puts out now because I hate the poses, though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Let me clarify that I don't hate pretty models, just the stupid poses every other model does in a lot of monopose models GW makes. I don't want a miniature of my Guardsman pulling a grenade by his teeth while jumping and holding a chainsword ready to attack, as the only build for him, and have one in ten models look almost exactly the same. It's boring, repetitive, and takes a lot of the cool factor away when I have eight other models doing the same exact thing.

This might be an exaggeration, but it's similar with some new models, where cultists and accursed cultists just seem like they'd have tons of repeats, which takes a lot of flair from them.

It's a problem with tactical rocks and huge scenic bases, too. It immediately draws me away from this being a battle into "These are game pieces." It ruins my immersion.

Nothing ruins a vibe like when you turn up to battle and everyone's rocks are identical.

Tactical rocks are standard issue. They should be the same between squads.

10 similar models, but none is the same for half the price is now worse than 5 different models with duplicates within a squad

that you have duplicates in army is one thing, but paying more to have duplicates within a unit, I just can't see a good point to defend this

the unit is going to be expensive enough and GW has the technology so that we could have 10 different models

the funny part here is that duplicates are ok for GW but the worst for other manufacturers (WM/H gets hate for having the same number of duplicates for the same price but it is totally fine for GW)

But maybe the new squad turns out to be cheaper than the current one, than it could be acceptable

Altruizine wrote:

There are four models with their left leg only on the ground. Two have their right leg ahead of it, two have it behind. That is a duplication of two leg sets, not four of one.

i think you are correct, 10 legs. Plus another ~5 from the command squad, and ~2 from the emplaced heavy weapons. Should be enough for anyone who cares about "variety."

kodos wrote:10 similar models, but none is the same for half the price is now worse than 5 different models with duplicates within a squad

that you have duplicates in army is one thing, but paying more to have duplicates within a unit, I just can't see a good point to defend this

the unit is going to be expensive enough and GW has the technology so that we could have 10 different models

the funny part here is that duplicates are ok for GW but the worst for other manufacturers (WM/H gets hate for having the same number of duplicates for the same price but it is totally fine for GW)

But maybe the new squad turns out to be cheaper than the current one, than it could be acceptable

There aren’t duplicates within a squad.