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.
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: I refuse to believe that those flaws in the models exist. Only a tiny percentage of those sent preview copies, whether for review or painting purposes have mentioned them. They have no reasons to hide such issues from the paying customer.
I've not read a plethora of reviews, but the first 2 I read, Stahly's and TableTopTime, both mentioned the problems.
but GW should have gone with separate guns and backpacks.
Never again will I do separate 6mm backpacks. The thousands sons I had to do were so fiddly. They made me regret my choice of game.
I ended up gluing them to cocktail sticks, glueing them on the back, letting them dry, then cutting the stick/superglue off. Thankfully there were metal so it was easy clean up. Plastic backpacks would be a mess!
I think it'd be easier to glue plastic backpacks on versus metal ones. For fiddly stuff like that, I usually just put a bit of blutack on a stick, use the stick to pick them up and hold them in place for a few seconds while the glue dries.
That said, I'm not really pro-multipart 8mm marines, I think the best option is to compromise the poses and be very careful with the direction the model is pointing to minimise the issue as much as possible. Like, don't have it so that the legs of a marine are joined by a giant blob of plastic, and don't have a marine elevating its gun high enough that it ends up with a blob joining the shoulder pad to the gun barrel.
Metal minis actually work better because they can have small undercuts.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/11/18 16:46:26
The infantry models are a pretty small part of the offering and it's easily dealt with with a bit of cleanup or just through careful painting. I'm not concerned. I'm also probably the only person that's pro the foot blobs too because it's going to make getting a decent bond to the bases way easier.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/11/18 16:48:39
dude, you can see from the pict that not even the cutting mat is in focus..
Will the undercuts disappear if we get them in focus?
Of course not, but if these picts were adequately in focus, the extent to which these models are "ruined" by them could be more accurately judged. All I can see now is that they are there, but without crisp photos, I wont be able to tell just how offensive I'd find them IRL
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2023/11/18 17:01:35
"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems"
I’m not overly bothered, but I can see why others might be.
Same. They are clearly visible in all the painting videos I've seen so far, the biggest issue is that people are using very pale colours & contrast paints which really don't help disguise them.
The quality is well below that of alternative metal minis at this scale, but the plastic sculpts to are on the same level of quality that the original epic stuff was. Maybe with more/sharper details.
My sub-par painting isn't going to cause these to be very noticeable (You can get away with a lot by painting badly over black & brown rather than white).
I intend to paint enough of them that anyone looking at them hard enough to spot the extra material on single minis, isn't looking at the whole game on display (and should probably not be in my house in the first place! )
I do expect there to be huge complaints about this come golden daemon time. Someone is going to win without removing that material and the forums will have a melt down.
I think it'd be easier to glue plastic backpacks on versus metal ones. For fiddly stuff like that, I usually just put a bit of blutack on a stick, use the stick to pick them up and hold them in place for a few seconds while the glue dries.
That would usually be my go to as well, but the connection point was so small for the backpacks that I'd actually tear it back off when removing the bluetak stick. It was far better to leave it glue to the stick and let them all dry over night before cutting the stick off.
That said, I'm sure shop brought superglue has gotten worse over the years. I don't recall having so many bottle of bad superglue as a kid.
If I had to do them again (which as I have another 100 or so marines tucked away for a rainy day that I've been avoiding due ot the backpacks) I might use some resin glue to glue & dry them a lot quicker.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/11/18 17:11:17
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: I refuse to believe that those flaws in the models exist. Only a tiny percentage of those sent preview copies, whether for review or painting purposes have mentioned them. They have no reasons to hide such issues from the paying customer.
I've not read a plethora of reviews, but the first 2 I read, Stahly's and TableTopTime, both mentioned the problems.
Yes both were very honest in their appraisals, I find that Stahly always is. The large percentage of the Instagram crowd were less so. Obviously the main issue has been GW's lack of shots showing these issues, just wish they had been more honest with their preview shots. So that potential customers had more time to make up their mind whether they accept the flaws or not. For some the first they will know of this is when they get their box the first week of December, not everyone lives online.
These flaws have completely ruled me out on the set, as seen earlier in the thread other people's mileage varies. It is a bit like Dorn Hole Mark II with how the issue has been largely ignored/glossed over by those given advance copies and GW themselves. To me here there is a duty of care to the paying customer.
but GW should have gone with separate guns and backpacks.
Never again will I do separate 6mm backpacks. The thousands sons I had to do were so fiddly. They made me regret my choice of game.
I ended up gluing them to cocktail sticks, glueing them on the back, letting them dry, then cutting the stick/superglue off. Thankfully there were metal so it was easy clean up. Plastic backpacks would be a mess!
I think it'd be easier to glue plastic backpacks on versus metal ones. For fiddly stuff like that, I usually just put a bit of blutack on a stick, use the stick to pick them up and hold them in place for a few seconds while the glue dries.
That said, I'm not really pro-multipart 8mm marines, I think the best option is to compromise the poses and be very careful with the direction the model is pointing to minimise the issue as much as possible. Like, don't have it so that the legs of a marine are joined by a giant blob of plastic, and don't have a marine elevating its gun high enough that it ends up with a blob joining the shoulder pad to the gun barrel.
Metal minis actually work better because they can have small undercuts.
Ultimately it's a decision between several bad choices. They can't please everyone, unfortunately, and I'm in the group that loses out. First reaction to those undercuts was that I really don't want to give GW money for something like that. It sends the wrong message.
I'd much prefer the models to look good, even if it entails work that makes me lose the will to live. I don't think I'll get that out of the Marine kit unless I take a knife to the models, and for the price that's a bit much to ask.
Billicus wrote: The infantry models are a pretty small part of the offering and it's easily dealt with with a bit of cleanup or just through careful painting. I'm not concerned. I'm also probably the only person that's pro the foot blobs too because it's going to make getting a decent bond to the bases way easier.
I don't think carving out your own details like an arm and half a shoulder pad, studs and all, is what I'd call easily dealt with. I very much doubt a bit of cleanup and careful painting are enough to make undercuts that outright replace parts of the sculpt look good.
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
RexHavoc wrote: The quality is well below that of alternative metal minis at this scale, but the plastic sculpts to are on the same level of quality that the original epic stuff was. Maybe with more/sharper details.
'Same level of quality as the original Epic stuff' is certainly damning with faint praise.
Especially when the alternatives nowadays are not just pewter, but 3D printed recreations of the same designs without the janky accommodations for injection molding. And likely cheaper to boot.
I was interested in picking up the official models to save myself the trouble of printing it, but yeesh, I might just get the rules.
RexHavoc wrote: The quality is well below that of alternative metal minis at this scale, but the plastic sculpts to are on the same level of quality that the original epic stuff was. Maybe with more/sharper details.
'Same level of quality as the original Epic stuff' is certainly damning with faint praise.
Especially when the alternatives nowadays are not just pewter, but 3D printed recreations of the same designs without the janky accommodations for injection molding. And likely cheaper to boot.
I was interested in picking up the official models to save myself the trouble of printing it, but yeesh, I might just get the rules.
I don't use 3d printed stuff, so I've not real comparison to make there. But against metal minis, these are subpar sculpts (imo)
They are definitely more detailed than the original GW plastics for epic, but I don't see them as being superior sculpts I'd expect of 30+ more years of plastic experience. I'm not complaining or slating the new models though, I like nice simplistic models that might not be the "best sculpts", but can be painted nicely for gaming with. GW tend to go overboard with details and make fragile models. The AoS nighhaunt are prime examples.
I'll take models that my sausage fingers don't snap at the ankles or gun barrels, over the best plastic miniatures the worlds leading company has to offer. These marines stand a chance to still be in one piece after a year. I've snapped so many ends off night haunt robes, I find them in places like you would cat hair!
Finished watching that batrep. Felt a little less swingy than Ash's video, but even in this one, shooting felt fairly inconsistent and melee was much more effective. Terminators seem very fragile and wussy at melee, dreads seem best melee units so far for the points. Assault marines having a 24" charge range seems to be their only redeeming quality, other than that I'd go all tacs and missile launcher dudes and as large dread talons as possible
It's concievable that once we get more varied units on the table, things will start making more sense. I can foresee a dreadnought talon drop podded into charge range being a nasty thing to deal with
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2023/11/18 17:34:00
"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems"
I don't think carving out your own details like an arm and half a shoulder pad, studs and all, is what I'd call easily dealt with. I very much doubt a bit of cleanup and careful painting are enough to make undercuts that outright replace parts of the sculpt look good.
Well no, resculpting the models isn't really what I had in mind, there are limits to what's reasonable. I also didn't say it would "make the undercuts look good". I was really just talking about making them look fine at arms' length.
I'd ay its easier to source extra models in the more inoffensive poses than to try to fix the more disfigured ones
"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems"
I waited till I saw a few reviews to make my decision. By the time I'd then sat in a GW queue, the decision had been taken from me anyway.
My main thoughts about all those awful undercuts is how this forum would be mocking like crazy if this had been a Mantic set of models. It seems much more forgiving because it's GW.
I do wonder how much Mantic will learn from seeing these before they develop the Warpath minis. I just hope they don't consider it an OK process because GW sell out doing it.
Currently most played: Silent Death, Mars Code Aurora, Battletech, Warcrow and Infinity.
Another batrep, this time we have a 1500 point game with a more reasonable selection of models, more indicative how the game will play with "proper" armies
EDIT: Having now finished watching, my previous concerns regarding this game have been alleviated. When played at 1500 points, with a more diverse selection of units, the game starts working as it should. I'm going to be picking up this game. It feels like Epic as I remember it from my youth
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2023/11/18 19:56:46
"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems"
On closer inspection of the previewed models, those are not as nice as we were to believe.
The asking price was already a bit much, but now we know alternative companies can offer better quality for less.
Not only is the core set quite bare (compared to Epic's previous starter box sets), bit due to the importance of buildings, it isn't even a full core set. The expensive buildings are also a required purchase, which just makes the cost even higher.
From all the noise coming in about sale performance, it seems to have sold very well, how many of that was scalpers getting their ebay stock ready remains to be seen.
The objective of the game is to win. The point of the game is to have fun. The two should never be confused.
Seems to play at a decent pace. Now at 1,100 points it’s not exactly a full game. But the hit/save with no to-wound ought to allow it to scale quite well.
More or less as I remember 2nd Ed, with combats proving typically decisive, so long as you pick your fights right and don’t bite off more than you can chew. Quite like adding 1D6 to your roll for extended scraps. Makes Titan Tipping somewhat feasible, albeit at significant risk and cost.
Quite like the Scale rule. It used to be only Super Heavies could pin their own kind in Combat, but that may have changed somewhat, as the Malcador was able to simply “nope” away in the same turn it was charged.
Crucially for me, Objectives Remain King. This is pleasing unto Nuggan and my own Nostalgia. Time will tell how much that holds true in larger battles. But, it’s a promising start.
As always being GW Homegrown this will have been somewhat stage managed, but it does a decent enough job of explaining and demonstrating the rules and mechanics. Which is the main point of GW Homegrown.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
but GW should have gone with separate guns and backpacks.
Never again will I do separate 6mm backpacks. The thousands sons I had to do were so fiddly. They made me regret my choice of game.
I ended up gluing them to cocktail sticks, glueing them on the back, letting them dry, then cutting the stick/superglue off. Thankfully there were metal so it was easy clean up. Plastic backpacks would be a mess!
If I had an extra set of 1/4 scale hands I could swap to, I would love separate backpacks & weapons. Lacking those, I'll pass.
Looks like the ebook is going to be US$37.99 so I'll be picking that up in two weeks (and not preordering).
I'll put the box set on the "To Be Purchased When Pile of Shame is Empty" list.
F - is the Fire that rains from the skies.
U - for Uranium Bomb!
N - is for No Survivors...
ListenToMeWarriors wrote: I refuse to believe that those flaws in the models exist. Only a tiny percentage of those sent preview copies, whether for review or painting purposes have mentioned them. They have no reasons to hide such issues from the paying customer.
I've not read a plethora of reviews, but the first 2 I read, Stahly's and TableTopTime, both mentioned the problems.
Yes both were very honest in their appraisals, I find that Stahly always is. The large percentage of the Instagram crowd were less so. Obviously the main issue has been GW's lack of shots showing these issues, just wish they had been more honest with their preview shots. So that potential customers had more time to make up their mind whether they accept the flaws or not. For some the first they will know of this is when they get their box the first week of December, not everyone lives online.
These flaws have completely ruled me out on the set, as seen earlier in the thread other people's mileage varies. It is a bit like Dorn Hole Mark II with how the issue has been largely ignored/glossed over by those given advance copies and GW themselves. To me here there is a duty of care to the paying customer.
Be aware that most smaller influencer are forced to write positive reviews by the NDA they sign, or in other words get early copies only if they leave those things out
And as they often make a living from doing GW there is no interest for not being very positive about everything
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
I wanted 1 thing that's Direct Only, Flying Bases.
Gone... lol
I see no point in the cards at this point since they don't contain *all* the cards. Might as well wait until the Mega-Uber-This is All Pack is released.
TalonZahn wrote: I wanted 1 thing that's Direct Only, Flying Bases.
Gone... lol
I see no point in the cards at this point since they don't contain *all* the cards. Might as well wait until the Mega-Uber-This is All Pack is released.
Well bugger, knew there was something I was forgetting
"I'll tell you right now: this is an expensive game. I will talk more about it in the review, but this is more expensive than 40k. If you think that you're getting into this as a cheaper alternative to 40k, you're wrong, it's the opposite, and that SHOCKS us. I think that holds the game back by a tremendous amount."
And this is coming from someone that seems pretty positive about it.
I wonder how is that possible. I got rulebook+templates+accessories + 2 titans + 2 parts of Solar Auxilia for 124€. I can fill a 5x4" table with that.
Once the aircraft and artillery are out, I'll get 1 box of each for less than 80€ and get +500 points.
TalonZahn wrote: I wanted 1 thing that's Direct Only, Flying Bases.
Gone... lol
Yea, stuff went quick. I was able to get my purchase at a GW store so I didn't miss out. I couldn't remember how many titan bases I needed so I didn't get those. Hopefully they'll be back in stock before November 2024.
the failed sculpts, blobs and pieces connecting backpacs and arms, vaguely reminds me of the AOBR set (my first set of 40k) the marines there were subpar (push fit, but subpar)...what really suprises me today is is that, having the posibility of making minis at that size way better (as shown in 3 D printing at home) they deliberatly decided to do them badly and risk the backlash of the guys that were going to buy the game for the epicness of the minis in the previews. Personally, i thought of painting the infantry as a personal challenge, and enjoing the diminutive size with magnifiers and brushes the size of needles...now, i'm reviewing my previous intentions and waiting for the next time the boxset is available (gonna buy it anyway, but now with less hope)
Managed to secure four boxed sets at two different venues, but I also have folks already in mind who wanted the extra books and Warhounds, which added to the discount I got makes a super cheap way to get piles of Infantry, tiny Russes, etc...
So, which kits are not represented at all in the starter? Is it just Rhinos and Baneblades that I need to buy separately?
Seems to play at a decent pace. Now at 1,100 points it’s not exactly a full game. But the hit/save with no to-wound ought to allow it to scale quite well.
More or less as I remember 2nd Ed, with combats proving typically decisive, so long as you pick your fights right and don’t bite off more than you can chew. Quite like adding 1D6 to your roll for extended scraps. Makes Titan Tipping somewhat feasible, albeit at significant risk and cost.
Quite like the Scale rule. It used to be only Super Heavies could pin their own kind in Combat, but that may have changed somewhat, as the Malcador was able to simply “nope” away in the same turn it was charged.
Crucially for me, Objectives Remain King. This is pleasing unto Nuggan and my own Nostalgia. Time will tell how much that holds true in larger battles. But, it’s a promising start.
As always being GW Homegrown this will have been somewhat stage managed, but it does a decent enough job of explaining and demonstrating the rules and mechanics. Which is the main point of GW Homegrown.
Doc, check out the 1500pts batrep I posted earlier. I really got the same feels from watching it as I remember from our own games of 2nd ed Space Marine. I think its safe to say this game is a keeper for fans of 2nd ed (infantry model undercut woes notwithstanding )
Playing just with the contents of the starterset though? Not going to cut it IMHO
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2023/11/18 20:05:47
"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems"
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: Managed to secure four boxed sets at two different venues, but I also have folks already in mind who wanted the extra books and Warhounds, which added to the discount I got makes a super cheap way to get piles of Infantry, tiny Russes, etc...
So, which kits are not represented at all in the starter? Is it just Rhinos and Baneblades that I need to buy separately?
In terms of new stuff, aside from rhinos and banes it's just the Kratos I think (you get Sicarans in the starter and they're not yet available separately, you don't get any Kratos in the starter but they *are* available separately)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/11/18 20:33:14
"I'll tell you right now: this is an expensive game. I will talk more about it in the review, but this is more expensive than 40k. If you think that you're getting into this as a cheaper alternative to 40k, you're wrong, it's the opposite, and that SHOCKS us. I think that holds the game back by a tremendous amount."
And this is coming from someone that seems pretty positive about it.
I wonder how is that possible. I got rulebook+templates+accessories + 2 titans + 2 parts of Solar Auxilia for 124€. I can fill a 5x4" table with that.
Once the aircraft and artillery are out, I'll get 1 box of each for less than 80€ and get +500 points.
Probably adding all the scenery needed for it, which won't be compatible with "regular" scaled miniatures, for the most part.
) 
Epic 40k + INQ6 Project Log 
INQ28/Necromunda/Inquisimunda Log 
11527pts Total (7400pts painted)
4980pts Total (4980pts painted)
3730 Total (210pts painted) 