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.

 The Power Cosmic wrote:
More than the material, I miss the hand-sculpted style over modern digital designs.

This right here. Digital design has its place (and, for sure, it’s a marvel what they can do with it), but I miss the older hand-crafted style that gave minis their personalities, warts and all.

I don’t particularly miss all the pinning and “what broke off now?” But some of the old one-piece models are still ace, like the early Eldar pirates.

I longed for all-plastic armies back when I was a teenager in the early 90s. I've always hated metal. That only thing it was ever good for was the speed in which you could release new miniatures compared to plastic injection molding, this was a necessity for GW back in the day as they were such a small business back then

I do, and I don't. But in the end I don't think it's the metal.

Plastic is a lot easier to work with, but when metal models were maybe one or two parts, they were a lot easier to work with - and since they were sculpted on a flat plane, a *lot* easier to paint.

Excepting, of course, anything larger than a single infantry model. Those were a pain in metal.

No. If metal must be used, it should be restricted to infantry sized one piece or two piece maximum. Anything other than that, it's a horrible material.

More than metal models I miss multipart plastics from GW that weren't a pain in the arse to put together and that accommodated kitbashing by design.

I love metal minis.

I don't miss them because I still have them, use them and buy them.

I love the old school style and the ease of prep.

Like many others I also like miltipose, multioption plastic kits, but I have very little interest in the fiddly multipart monopose figures that GW seems to be currently in love with.

Theres not one material that is optimal for all needs in my opinion.

I will try point out most popular variables and which materials I would prefer.


- Small scale wargaming miniatures around 10 -15mm - These should be single pieces and done in metal since metal holds small detail better than plastic and is more resistant to break.
- Medium Scale Wargaming single miniatures 28- 32mm - Metal for detail these should be your heroes and characters where detail is important
- Medium Scale Wargaming Multipart miniatures 28- 32mm - Plastic for multipart regiments for easy to use and assemble etc.
- Large Scale Wargaming miniatures- Your monster and vehicles - Plastic all the way.

- Miniatures for painters and display only - High grade resin casts for bigger pieces but metal should be ok for simpler and smaller miniatures too.

- Boardgames resins, Finecast low grade resin and any 3d print whatever resin they use(no one knows for sure what you are going to get) I avoid and dont buy at all.

I dont miss metal because many manufacturers still use it wisely on the correct miniatures, in fact just sculpted one to be done in metal.


Theres also another factor in play that is if your army is 100minis or just a skirmish warband of 15minis. I can have metal only for smaller forces.

I prefer plastic too.

However, I do admit to using metal washers under bases as well to give models a bit more heft. They are far to light-weight without it.

I've got a huge collection of metals but I definitely don't prefer them anymore despite still working with them in things like Infinity. They're just harder to transport, heavy in any real volume and a LOT more prone to chipped paint and the like. You just have to baby them all around.

That said, plastic isn't perfect. GW can do incredible things with it, but there's still things it doesn't do particularly well like hair and texture. For the most part though, I think resins offer a lot of the sculpting advantages of metals while still being lightweight. In particular, they allow for big, highly detailed muscles and fur that both plastics and resins often struggle with. The main issue with resins is that fine details can often be brittle and they tend to be expensive.

So..... IDK. I like HIPS plastics. They're definitely convenient but its really up to the artist to make the most out of it, and there are definitely fantastic sculpts out there that work better in other materials.

Seems like we could do a chart of the various casting methods.

Metal-expensive materials, cheap molds, bad for multipart, tough.
Resin-cheap materials, cheap molds, labor intensive, fragile
Styrene Plastic-cheap materials, expensive molds, reasonably tough

I'll think about ways to present it.

Immediately I want to answer "yes". I have a bunch of metal models in my Death Guard army, some of which are RT-era, some are 2E fantasy.

I do like the heft of them, but I wouldn't dislike them if they were in plastic. I like to cut and kitbash, and metal does have its issues when it comes to this.

What I do miss is those sculpts. I generally dislike everything about the newer GW aesthetic. It seems to be far more focused on "because we could", rather than telling stories with the sculpts, proportions and poses. It's very impressive what they can do with plastic kits. But it's just showing off. And it makes the kits impractical to store, to game with and to customise.

Give me a few squat little X-poses and I'm happy.

No, what I miss is models hand sculpted by people with arts degrees and a deep understanding of anatomy, sense of motion, weight distribution etc

Metal for me. Sculpted by hand is better than digital in my opinion. Those old minis have tons more character and charm. There's still people making them as well, like Diehard Miniatures.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Seems like we could do a chart of the various casting methods.

Metal-expensive materials, cheap molds, bad for multipart, tough.
Resin-cheap materials, cheap molds, labor intensive, fragile
Styrene Plastic-cheap materials, expensive molds, reasonably tough

I'll think about ways to present it.

The lack of undercuts is the big limitation for HIPS. GW are absolute wizards and working around it, but it absolutely impacts sculpting in a way that other methods aren't limited by.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Seems like we could do a chart of the various casting methods.

Metal-expensive materials, cheap molds, bad for multipart, tough.
Resin-cheap materials, cheap molds, labor intensive, fragile
Styrene Plastic-cheap materials, expensive molds, reasonably tough

I'll think about ways to present it.

The lack of undercuts is the big limitation for HIPS. GW are absolute wizards and working around it, but it absolutely impacts sculpting in a way that other methods aren't limited by.

Dealing with the under cut issue is why modern GW plastics go together like jigsaw puzzles and have so many odd parts. You want detail from multiple angles in HIPS, you need multiple parts.

I've never found lack of undercuts to be such a big deal. On the table you can never see them if the models are designed at all well. I've a boatload of those LOTR plastics that have this issue and at tabletop distance during a game they look great to me.

I'd rather have those monopose LOTR that are a breeze to assemble than the modern nightmare jigsaws any day. I know I'm in a minority there though!

Wargames Atlantic has published 18 sprues so far this year that are all in the classic body + head + arm + arm configuration. Non jigsaw models are doing fine!

Oh absolutely. I'm a huge fan of North Star for this reason and I have some Wargames Atlantic too, a bit pricier but very good quality. Can't wait for the Damned to come out over here in shops.

To be fair to GW, they have made some amazing push-fits that have great detail and only a couple of parts. Minimal undercut issues.

If GW never replaced those metal Characters with Finecast we would have a very positive overall balance.

Metal is perfect for those dynamic smaller one pieces.

Undercuts mostly just create some limits on what works. They don't LOOK bad, they just push you to avoid certain things like hairstyles and surface details. GW has kind of fit their artstyle to work with it and has loads of creative workarounds because they do their own tooling, but you still don't see the kind of detailed hair and surface textures you often find on metals and resins.

lord_blackfang wrote:Wargames Atlantic has published 18 sprues so far this year that are all in the classic body + head + arm + arm configuration. Non jigsaw models are doing fine!

Indeed. WGA, Northstar and others are making the kind of wonderful kits that take me right back to the late 90's and 00's when a plastick figure kit was a relatively easy to assemble box of possibility with tons of options for customization and easy kitbashing/mixing. I find these kind of kits to be a joy to assemble and modify.

GW may have mostly abandoned this kind of kit, but that's ok as I've mostly abandoned them.

Da Boss wrote:I've never found lack of undercuts to be such a big deal. On the table you can never see them if the models are designed at all well. I've a boatload of those LOTR plastics that have this issue and at tabletop distance during a game they look great to me.

I'd rather have those monopose LOTR that are a breeze to assemble than the modern nightmare jigsaws any day. I know I'm in a minority there though!

I also have no real problems with lack of undercuts. As you say, you can almost never tell on the tabletop and my painting skills (and let's be honest, most people's painting skills) aren't good enough for having increased detail on more sides of the model.

I really like my old metal models and honestly I enjoy painting them more. Metal is really easy to clean when it's a used model and less assembly in most cases. Monstrous creatures can be a giant pain if you are not used to pinning. I also really enjoy the old sculpts over some of the newer ones. I keep buying old used metal models and enjoy the hunt for something nostalgic.

I'm not sure I would say that I fully miss metal models though because plastic is just better in many ways. Plastic isn't as prone to chipping and can handle a little more rough handling without parts falling off. but it breaks easier.

Plastic by far. I can't imagine playing a whole Green Tide army solely with metal models and trying to move all that across the table. Single one-piece metal models for things like Mordheim are fine, but once you get into things that requiring pinning or are a nightmare to assemble (looking at you old SAG!) it's a lot better to go back to plastic just for ease of transportation and durability.

The metal Greater Daemons were especially challenging, since the codex said they could not be pinned.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The metal Greater Daemons were especially challenging, since the codex said they could not be pinned.

Actually chuckled out loud for that one. Bravo.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The metal Greater Daemons were especially challenging, since the codex said they could not be pinned.

Lol, fantastic.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The metal Greater Daemons were especially challenging, since the codex said they could not be pinned.

Lol, fantastic.

Well done. You win the internet for today.

Yes I do, I still have alot of them.