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.

Why would they do this

 Breotan wrote:
GW has a new painting tutorial up on Youtube that uses LI models. Unfortunately, their production values continue to decline.

Spoiler:

In their defense painting tutorial at this scale can seem a bit like a catch 22, you obviously have to focus on one base at a time but the scale required to show technique is already magnified far beyond anyone's ability to perceive without a loup or some kind of optics. That's not excuse for technically getting worse in terms of production but I understand something that small really pushing the limit compared to showing 28mm models.


Was actually hoping they would fo a terrain painting video with the new ruins, Concerned with the tiles being sorta gw's standard that all we'll see from now on on the terrain/game board front will be unbroken urban landscapes and nothing else.

They`ve also done a solar auxilia painting video, and there they opted for a darker scheme. End result is honestly much better than the marines in the earlier video. Either the technique they`ve chosen for the tutorials doesn`t work too well for brighter colours, or these type of schemes just don`t look too good in such close up on camera. Either way, the marine tutorial really shows them in a bad way.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Breotan wrote:
GW has a new painting tutorial up on Youtube that uses LI models. Unfortunately, their production values continue to decline.

Spoiler:

In their defense painting tutorial at this scale can seem a bit like a catch 22, you obviously have to focus on one base at a time but the scale required to show technique is already magnified far beyond anyone's ability to perceive without a loup or some kind of optics. That's not excuse for technically getting worse in terms of production but I understand something that small really pushing the limit compared to showing 28mm models.


Was actually hoping they would fo a terrain painting video with the new ruins, Concerned with the tiles being sorta gw's standard that all we'll see from now on on the terrain/game board front will be unbroken urban landscapes and nothing else.

I’m pretty sure Breotan was just indulging in the irony of claiming the bases work great with dark schemes then sticking Death Guard on them.

Hmm, I know GW occasionally advertises with "achievable results" as the focus, but that screenshot doesn't exactly look like it's going to sell anyone on the models.

 Geifer wrote:
Hmm, I know GW occasionally advertises with "achievable results" as the focus, but that screenshot doesn't exactly look like it's going to sell anyone on the models.

When nobody wants to achieve those results

If those are from the batch painting video it’s fine, but shouldn’t zoom in. Put them down with some tanks and units so can see on the table.

Also those shades suck for that, use a tone paint to bring your paint scheme to neutral before highlighting for batch painting. Looks way nicer…would also fill in the details on such small minis easy.

Kretualdo wrote:
They`ve also done a solar auxilia painting video, and there they opted for a darker scheme. End result is honestly much better than the marines in the earlier video. Either the technique they`ve chosen for the tutorials doesn`t work too well for brighter colours, or these type of schemes just don`t look too good in such close up on camera. Either way, the marine tutorial really shows them in a bad way.

True but I still felt it was just too close, but in fairness too technically I don't think they're doing all they can on their end to get deep focus ect but any plan that sees a 25mm base of infantry filling a lot of the screen, just doesn't seem like a good way to go. I did like the solar aux, but it's all in that end effect of seeing them together as opposed to a single base.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr_Rose wrote:

I’m pretty sure Breotan was just indulging in the irony of claiming the bases work great with dark schemes then sticking Death Guard on them.

Ya it was more the production comment, which I agree with its got issues.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Geifer wrote:
Hmm, I know GW occasionally advertises with "achievable results" as the focus, but that screenshot doesn't exactly look like it's going to sell anyone on the models.

I think it's fair too to say that focus on the tanks might have been better, the infantry tend to look better in pics where there's loads of bases.




Has anyone heard anything more about the little cyclops remote bombs they previewed a while back with the solar aux rapiers/aa box?

 Crablezworth wrote:
Has anyone heard anything more about the little cyclops remote bombs they previewed a while back with the solar aux rapiers/aa box?

No new information. The models are too small to be sold by themselves as standalone plastic kits, so they probably be produced in resin or put on a plastic sprue alongside other models.

Well, we know they’re part of the Auxilia Rapier set?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/08/03/heresy-thursday-fire-support-and-remote-control-bombs-for-the-solar-auxilia/

They’re not on the box art, but the article says they’re all part of one set.

12 Rapiers (four of each weapon

12 Tarantulas (6 of each weapon

And as we’re told 28 models in total? 4 Cyclops.

That makes sense.

Speaking of paintjobs, I really like some of the models showcased in the WHC community painted article







Is it a coincidence that these are more on the darker side?

Can't get over how SICK Liam's paintjob is.. If he had cleaned the moldline from the Cannon barrel, that model could almost pass as a 28mil piece!

My apologies if I have missed this already, but /tg/ has posted some photos of the infantry from, shall we say 'less flattering angles'.
Presented without comment.

not impressed for that price point

 Geifer wrote:
Hmm, I know GW occasionally advertises with "achievable results" as the focus, but that screenshot doesn't exactly look like it's going to sell anyone on the models.

main problem is when they make the point that white bases look better with dark models (and black bases with white models) and than putting the white models on white bases

Mozzamanx wrote:
My apologies if I have missed this already, but /tg/ has posted some photos of the infantry from, shall we say 'less flattering angles'.
Presented without comment.

Spoiler:

That to me shows that GW doesn't know how to make single piece minis anymore xD. They'be been spoiled by being able to explode minis into a thousand tiny parts to avoid undercuts... and then you get this xDDDD

Well that is an atrocity and I would be livid right now if I had preordered. Funny how that gak never showed up in 3 months of previews.

Also does that Sicaran Omega have plasmas laying horizontally?

Mozzamanx wrote:
My apologies if I have missed this already, but /tg/ has posted some photos of the infantry from, shall we say 'less flattering angles'.
Presented without comment.

Spoiler:

Oh, dear.

Just in case you missed some of what the arrows are pointing at.

I will admit that trying to get that much detail at that scale can be a MoFo. Even 3d printing results may vary, but I haven't seen anything as rough as this.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Well that is an atrocity and I would be livid right now if I had preordered. Funny how that gak never showed up in 3 months of previews.

might be that the preview models are all the pre-release 3d prints
also, the bad mould lines for the first KT Orcs were also never shown as those things are not part of previews

also, as GW makes the best plastic models out there, people will say that this are the best models possible at that scale for that price

No, 3d prints are totally different in that regard... you'd never get something like that because undercuts are not a thing, you could get support marks or layer lines, but not this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
also, as GW makes the best plastic models out there, people will say that this are the best models possible at that scale for that price

Well, they could have accounted for it on the poses chosen. They didn't

GW really knew how to work the angles in production photography. Imo the sculpts in question are unacceptable and should never have been released

New bases are hollow just less space so can still glue magnets or washers underneath

 Matrindur wrote:
New bases are hollow just less space so can still glue magnets or washers underneath

Groovy. And i was thinking whether drilling holes would be worth the effort.

Looks like lots of knife work.

Yikes. I hope those are like, starter box sculpts. With something better coming. We've seen similar before. Would it be that awful to make it two parts? A bolter and a body like... Every other marine in the last 40 years? Just itsy bitsy.

axotl wrote:
Yikes. I hope those are like, starter box sculpts. With something better coming. We've seen similar before. Would it be that awful to make it two parts? A bolter and a body like... Every other marine in the last 40 years? Just itsy bitsy.

They have already confirmed that the same sprue from the starter box is in the infantry boxes, so don't get your hopes high, unless you expect a lot of resins... and if it comes to that, why wait. Get printed proxies.

axotl wrote:
Yikes. I hope those are like, starter box sculpts. With something better coming. We've seen similar before. Would it be that awful to make it two parts? A bolter and a body like... Every other marine in the last 40 years? Just itsy bitsy.

I had some Missile Lancher marines printed at 8mm with the launcher separate.

I'd rather have the blob weapon than glue those 40 launchers on again.

 TalonZahn wrote:

axotl wrote:
Yikes. I hope those are like, starter box sculpts. With something better coming. We've seen similar before. Would it be that awful to make it two parts? A bolter and a body like... Every other marine in the last 40 years? Just itsy bitsy.

I had some Missile Lancher marines printed at 8mm with the launcher separate.

I'd rather have the blob weapon than glue those 40 launchers on again.

Interesting choice... usually you print them in a single piece ^^

Yea, I had a bunch of stuff printed by 2 different people to see what everything came out like in the end.

The other printer did them as one piece, so much easier and no difference in quality.

I have zoomed right in on the figures we have seen so far and none look to have that bad level of quality...and you CAN see the same areas.

I accept they may have been worked on with a knife etc.