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.

 zend wrote:
It’s a game piece, so your anal definition of a scale model doesn’t matter 😂


Nobody tell these guys that GW’s fliers and Great Unclean One have been completely hollow with gaping holes in the bottom of the kit for years

I've just double-checked and it seems my AT titans don't actually have plasma reactors inside! We've all been duped!

Hmm yes this is very clearly a respectful discussion being conducted in good faith and backed with arguments instead of simply exaggerately mocking everyone that disagrees with you.

I understand that some of you might not be bothered by the lack of a bottom plate, but in my case at the same price level of that kit I can find (and have) garage kits with fully built interiors that you can only see through natches, or window slits.

To be honest if this came from a lesser known brand it wouldn't bother me as much, but as some already said GW prides itself as the Porche of miniatures so this seems doubly cheap.

M.

 RomanHockeyAlligator wrote:
Hmm yes this is very clearly a respectful discussion being conducted in good faith and backed with arguments instead of simply exaggerately mocking everyone that disagrees with you.

I see you're new to Dakka Dakka, welcome!

 Miguelsan wrote:
I understand that some of you might not be bothered by the lack of a bottom plate, but in my case at the same price level of that kit I can find (and have) garage kits with fully built interiors that you can only see through natches, or window slits.

To be honest if this came from a lesser known brand it wouldn't bother me as much, but as some already said GW prides itself as the Porche of miniatures so this seems doubly cheap.

I think that's the disconnect here though. GW have never marketed themselves as competing with scale model kits that focus on perfect accuracy. Warhammer is essentially comic book minatures - display pieces with most aspects exaggerated and dialled up to eleven. When they release a tank from the "drive closer so I can hit them with my sword" faction, it's not surprising that they focused on adding extra customisation that people can see over details that 99% won't.

 xttz wrote:
When they release a tank from the "drive closer so I can hit them with my sword" faction, it's not surprising that they focused on adding extra customisation that people can see over details that 99% won't.

Yet this is the first time that they've done it...

Some really funny posts here

Sorry to say but arguments are a bit skewed, I mean you may not mind it and thats fine, some do and thats fine too.

But claims like

"this is a gaming piece"
Its also a display modelling piece for many... but even if it was just a gaming piece a big hole on the bottom will make the integrity of the body box less sturdy than a closed one, so again you want your gaming tokens to be battle strong and less fragile.

"GW does not compete with model scale kits and its comic book style"
Why not? High quality plastic injection is abundant there and share sprues technologies etc...competing with mom and pop resin shed vehicles is not competition... Besides comic book vs accurate designs is an aesthetic design choice not what we are talking about here, which is complete sprues and plastic kits.

"You like to make drama! Its just a large hole on the bottom of the vehicle but you got all the weapons"
Well a £50 kit should have all the weapons and IMO should also have the bottom. Just because GW is legendary dodgy when supplying all the weapons on other kits does not mean its acceptable... but neither is a hole

"you need to increase the kit price by a lot to add that sprue, GW is not going to give it for free"
Well I dont know the exact profit margins here but I know its a £50 kit... Could they still have a big margin and adding the bottom wall? Probably? Its luxury brand so expect luxury silly prices... but also expect quality product which is hole proof.
GW finances are in good health no? No need for this then. Its just diluting the Ferrari reputation man

Going back yes it's an easy fix, not a problem anyone can do that, I would 100% do it... thing is IMO no one should need to be fixing large holes on a £50 Kit in GW 2023.
bad move for the brand.

It's depressing that the same people as always are once again mocking anyone who has the temerity to criticise this decision, even mocking some of our calmest and most logical people (like Miguelsan), who pretty clearly spell out the reasons why cutting corners when asking such a high price could perhaps just maybe leave a sour taste in someone's mouth.

"Turns out my Titan doesn't really have a reactor in it! LOLZ!"

Yeah. Good one.

Mozzamanx wrote:

Spoiler:

I would say it's pretty bad.

Ha! That's pretty funny.

I mean I don't really care - one of my earliest 40k memories is looking on the underside of a tank in a GW store and seeing that someone had painted "Why are you even looking here?" onto it. It made me laugh, so I don't care if the new tank doesn't have a bottom or not. Many years later I would paint "Why look here?" on the underside of my first Russ.

But I sympathise with those that see it as incomplete given the utterly absurd price GW are asking (not as absurd as Creed and Lord Horseyman), and I'm not about to mock them for saying so just because it doesn't matter to me personally.

The only big gripe I have when it comes to the model is that is now makes things like trench rails etc even more difficult to fit, Which was already a problem with the exhaust placement on the tank.

Otherwise, I have no gripes with the model having a gap.

GW's justification for this would be interesting to know. If it is because it wouldn't fit on 3x sprues, they perceived it wasn't needed on the model as it was sturdy enough without... Or, GW are cutting costs, which I wouldn't be surprised by, but also how much cost would they be saving?

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
...GW's justification for this would be interesting to know...

Bold of you to assume they have a justification prepared.

big hole in bottom of tank? Looks like a job for plasticard!

But yeah, it's very clearly to save room on the sprue for more important details, like 15 more heavy stubbers.

From the days of yore, when you would flip vehicles over to show they had been wrecked, I can see this being a big no-no, but with how many sticky-outy bits there are on this tank, I wouldn't dare flip it upside down.

I prefer showing wrecks by using cotton puffs sprayed with a bit of black primer.

I find it amusing that the company which invalidated several squads in my IG army, because they don't currently make a kit with that weapon option, expects us to use plasticard to complete one of their models.

Not since they told Eldar players to use spoons to make their transports...

Really I think everyone should email customer service with a picture and say their tank is missing a part, can you please send it.

Or maybe this is what that extra plate in the Chimera is for?

Forward planning!

It's not a deal breaker for me though it's an odd decision.

Then again, I never used to add the panels and hatches on the underside of the original Rhino model but kept them in a bits box for scratch build models.

Those saved hatches added detail to card bunkers.

Ah yes here we are. Just buy 2 Chimeras and you should have enough extra parts to finish your Rogal Dorn!

 zend wrote:
Nobody tell these guys that GW’s fliers and Great Unclean One have been completely hollow with gaping holes in the bottom of the kit for years, their fragile psyche might not be able to handle such news.

Which fliers have "gaping holes in the bottom of the kit"?

Given the GUO is designed to be attached to a base, a gap on the underside is less of a concern.

I imagine he's talking about the cross the flying base slots into.

Maybe that's it!

Thr Rogal Dorn is actually a skimmer and this is where you munt the flying base!

Something I plan to do once my gaming club has a Rogal Dorn tank is to aggressively place the tank above terrain features that are small enough to "get swallowed" by the hole and then call out my opponent on his tanks not being able to do that because they have bottoms.

From GW's perspective, this is a feature, not a bug. It allows Forgeworld to sell a resin add-on kit to fill in the hole later on for just an additional €50.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

caladancid wrote:
It is strange to see people defending the cheap decision to leave the bottom open.

GW charges premium prices...you should expect premium product.

Ummm...so you would prefer no hole but higher price?

That sure is the only possible alternative.

With gw yes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 RomanHockeyAlligator wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Your tank has no bottom.

But otherwise has all the guns and gubbins it should have in the game.

Please. Explain how that’s not a complete kit?

Ok.show me picture of irl dorn tank(real. Not fake) with complete bottom.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I imagine he's talking about the cross the flying base slots into.

Well, that would be that poster's cross to bear, Kid - but I know I wouldn't count that as a "gaping hole int he bottom", especiall compared to the Dorn.

tneva82 - At no point did the quoted definition require a scale model to be a scale model of something in the real world. For example, there are (unfortunately) many scale models of Gundams, or scale models of assorted spaceships from various franchises. You'd be annoyed if you bought a scale model of, I don't know, the USS Enterprise-D or a Corellian Blockade Runner from Star Wars, and the kit had a gaping hole that wasn't in how you'd seen them on screen, wouldn't you? Same deal here.

Clearly the tank lacks a bottom so a gamer can put their hand in there as a form of puppet while making 'pew pew' noises.

Looking at the GW webstore, old plastic Cadians have now been removed. Catachans are now sitting as the only 'cheap' troops option.

The Dorn is awesome, it can even double as safe box for fragile HQ models when transporting you army!

 Fayric wrote:
The Dorn is awesome, it can even double as safe box for fragile HQ models when transporting you army!

You can buy three and play three-'card'-monte with a squig

The good folk on /tg/ are doing a similar job of ripping on the Rogal Dorn and have noticed that the treads on the underside are not detailed, they are not flat, but they are actively hollowed out.
It's a similar argument in that they will almost never be observable, but I thought it was funny at least. I'm not sure what the reason for doing this could possibly be other than the relatively miniscule amount of plastic saved by not filling them in?

Off topic post (no moaning/whinging)

I hope FW do a conversion kit to turn it into a Ragnarok, plus other kits obviously... It would be a brief glimpse of the FW of origins.

Mozzamanx wrote:
The good folk on /tg/ are doing a similar job of ripping on the Rogal Dorn and have noticed that the treads on the underside are not detailed, they are not flat, but they are actively hollowed out.
It's a similar argument in that they will almost never be observable, but I thought it was funny at least. I'm not sure what the reason for doing this could possibly be other than the relatively miniscule amount of plastic saved by not filling them in?

Thinner parts may be beneficial in the injection-moulding process, they cool faster and don't take in as much heat, which allows for faster turnaround in production. Saved time on the tool is probably more important than the saved raw material.

Could itbe so they don't scratch mats or tables?

tneva82 wrote:

Ok.show me picture of irl dorn tank(real. Not fake) with complete bottom.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that the "real" Dorn tank in the 40k universe has a hollow bottom? Do you really need photo proof that water is wet?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Could itbe so they don't scratch mats or tables?

Doubt it. The LRBT and Baneblade have normal solid bottom sections and tracks, and the omitted lower hull on the Dorn wouldn't be touching the table.

Aecus Decimus wrote:
the "real" Dorn tank in the 40k universe has a hollow bottom

This is now my headcanon.

Maybe the crew removed the bottom panel to check if anyone installed a bomb that goes off if they slow their advance on the enemy?

Tsagualsa wrote:
Back when the prices for this batch of stuff were announced, a couple of people mentioned that the Dorn was cheaper than they feared. If compromises like this are the price for this i think a majority of players would take that deal

It's not a compromise and GW does not pass savings on to the customer.

Someone pointed out that the new Proteus has 5 full sprues and comes in at £52.50. I think it's completely reasonable to ask for a 4th sprue at the current price that includes a base plate alongside some more bits to pad out the sprue.
As it stands it feels like an unnecessary level of optimisation at the expense of the player. GW are clearly comfortable releasing larger, more complete tanks at a similar price point so I don't understand the corner-cutting.