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.

 Snord wrote:
I suppose we can hope that, having got all of their premier games onto the churn roundabout, GW will slow the actual release cycle down a bit. It doesn't have to be 3 years.

I'm glad I didn't buy the rest of the army books for this edition. I was intending to get the Mechanicum book, but the rumours of a new edition put me off. I wonder how carefully GW have analysed the rewards of frequent releases of new editions of a game versus the loss of revenue from people holding back from purchases as an edition reaches its expiry date.

I wonder how much of a profit they make from the books. I feel like they are just a reason to get people to buy new models.

 Snord wrote:
I suppose we can hope that, having got all of their premier games onto the churn roundabout, GW will slow the actual release cycle down a bit. It doesn't have to be 3 years.

GW slowing the churn cycle OR me winning the Lottery the next time it reaches some ridiculous amount..... ONE of these things has higher odds of happening than the other. I'll let you guess wich one.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

I wonder how much of a profit they make from the books. I feel like they are just a reason to get people to buy new models.

Publishing those books is still a department on its own with their own KPIs and targets to meet. Doesn't matter to the "book people" how many minis are sold or not sold. That's not where they get their bonuses and promotions from.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

I wonder how much of a profit they make from the books. I feel like they are just a reason to get people to buy new models.

Publishing those books is still a department on its own with their own KPIs and targets to meet. Doesn't matter to the "book people" how many minis are sold or not sold. That's not where they get their bonuses and promotions from.

Sucks to be them considering how much more convenient sourcing them is.



Also anyone that thinks old resin tacticals were better than modern plastic never worked with resin. Such an annoying material and FW can be real hit and miss with quality

stratigo wrote:
Also anyone that thinks old resin tacticals were better than modern plastic never worked with resin. Such an annoying material and FW can be real hit and miss with quality

I've worked with plenty of resin, it can sometimes be annoying to clean up, but plastic is a lot easier to mar/ruin (scratches, plastic glue overspill etc) and with some resin kits there's actually fewer pieces to assemble, less mould gates also.
FW has always replaced faulty kits for me too, so quality hasn't really been an issue.

At the end of the day, expense or build difficulty is irrelevant to me. Resin often looks better in the end, with better design cues, proportions and customization across a huge selection of kits, which is what i value the most.

I like the look of the mkii armour as it has always been my favourite, but I wish they at least sculpted the poses differently. The body poses for Mkii, iii and VI all look exactly the same, which for me makes having different armour marks feel less purposeful.

 JamesY wrote:
I like the look of the mkii armour as it has always been my favourite, but I wish they at least sculpted the poses differently. The body poses for Mkii, iii and VI all look exactly the same, which for me makes having different armour marks feel less purposeful.

Agreed, it's very noticable and feels just lazy from GW.

Luke1993 wrote:

stratigo wrote:
Also anyone that thinks old resin tacticals were better than modern plastic never worked with resin. Such an annoying material and FW can be real hit and miss with quality

I've worked with plenty of resin, it can sometimes be annoying to clean up, but plastic is a lot easier to mar/ruin (scratches, plastic glue overspill etc) and with some resin kits there's actually fewer pieces to assemble, less mould gates also.
FW has always replaced faulty kits for me too, so quality hasn't really been an issue.

At the end of the day, expense or build difficulty is irrelevant to me. Resin often looks better in the end, with better design cues, proportions and customization across a huge selection of kits, which is what i value the most.

Resin, of course, usually looks worse than plastic now.

I can pick up my suzerains and look at the lump of undetailed resin from the back between their legs. Plastic never has this problem these days.

Plastic axes don't break when I accidently brush against them.


Oh, plastic tanks don't come so warped to be fething unworkable.

Storm Eagle

nuff said about resin

Luke1993 wrote:

 JamesY wrote:
I like the look of the mkii armour as it has always been my favourite, but I wish they at least sculpted the poses differently. The body poses for Mkii, iii and VI all look exactly the same, which for me makes having different armour marks feel less purposeful.

Agreed, it's very noticable and feels just lazy from GW.

There’s a purpose to it though. Heavy and Special weapon sets, all with specific guns for specific body poses, with extra arms for the heavy weapons.

And as someone who painted…erm….130, I think (might be more?) MkVI, the set poses, once you’re used to them, makes painting a breeze as I know where the detail I want to pick out is, and how best to access it.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And as someone who painted…erm….130, I think

If you haven't painted at least 140 I can't take your advice seriously.

Anyone claiming that these models are worse because they're one pose for every five has the most rosy of tinted glasses because all the old kits were literally the same thing.

The only difference was that you could swap torsos and legs, which requires multiple different kits to do in the first place. Great if you have a large bitz box, but of no consequence if you're just starting out.

 Gert wrote:
Anyone claiming that these models are worse because they're one pose for every five has the most rosy of tinted glasses because all the old kits were literally the same thing.

The only difference was that you could swap torsos and legs, which requires multiple different kits to do in the first place. Great if you have a large bitz box, but of no consequence if you're just starting out.

What about the first plastic Mk3 and Mk4? Never had them but I know they were 10 sculpts per sprue, like modern 40k gak. Or were they doubled up?

The weapon stats article was enough for me.
They have changed too many things and it no longer qualifies as a revision.
Its a new game using the existing models.
Learning yet another system is too much for me.

WRT the models, IMO the 5 poses are much more noticable in 40k when you might have 4 of each pose in your whole army.
Once you get to HH size forces, it gets kinda murky.
Mad Doc's comment holds weight as well. After a certain number, it is more help on the model/paint side. The versatility of the weapons kits can take precedent to completely unique poses for each armor set.
I will admit they could have tweaked the leg stances for a couple of the marks.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There’s a purpose to it though. Heavy and Special weapon sets, all with specific guns for specific body poses, with extra arms for the heavy weapons.

Yes, but no.

Yes, that way the arms of the extra sets fit, but no, that's not the only way they could have found to make sure of that. There could have made different poses that still were compatible with the arms.

But this way is easier because they already had the rigs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Gert wrote:
Anyone claiming that these models are worse because they're one pose for every five has the most rosy of tinted glasses because all the old kits were literally the same thing.

The only difference was that you could swap torsos and legs, which requires multiple different kits to do in the first place. Great if you have a large bitz box, but of no consequence if you're just starting out.

What about the first plastic Mk3 and Mk4? Never had them but I know they were 10 sculpts per sprue, like modern 40k gak. Or were they doubled up?

Those were fully modular, so 10 sets of legs, 10 sets of torsos... the works

I'm not saying that the new kits are worse than the previous ones. Whilst the original mkiii and iv had the benefit of more posability and easy kit bashing, the newer ones do look far better, imo. The issue that I have with them is just that the poses are exactly the same from kit to kit with very little that can be done easily to vary that beyond a replacement head and pauldrons. Having built a great many of both over the years, the saminess of the new kits is really apparent when you have dozens of them sat in front of you compared to the older ones.

And in regards to the special and heavy weapons, they could have sculpted different poses but with arm poses that still would have been compatible, it just would have taken more work. Making them all exactly the same was the easy option, not the only option.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And as someone who painted…erm….130, I think

If you haven't painted at least 140 I can't take your advice seriously.

Well, the good news is it’s actually….

60 Tactical
10 Volkite Caliver
10 Volkite Culverin
10 Plasma Gun
10 Plasma Cannon
10 Autocannon
10 Meltagun
10 Missile Launcher
10 Lascannon

So…yeah. 140.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
What about the first plastic Mk3 and Mk4? Never had them but I know they were 10 sculpts per sprue, like modern 40k gak. Or were they doubled up?

Calling them "10 sculpts" is a stretch when they're 90% the same. The MkIII was a little bit different due to the way the legs went together as two separate pieces, but the torso couldn't be positioned beyond one direction due to the armour flap.

If you go back to the FW resin stuff, then ironically, it's the same situation. 5 leg options were all you got with them.

 Albertorius wrote:
Those were fully modular, so 10 sets of legs, 10 sets of torsos... the works

Torsos that were all the same and legs that were 90% the same pose. Mhm yes so modular and so varied.

The notion that the older kits were superior because the MkIV could have the torso positioned 1 degree spin to the left or right is just silly.

 Gert wrote:
The notion that the older kits were superior because the MkIV could have the torso positioned 1 degree spin to the left or right is just silly.

The notion that somehow five poses for all plastic tacticals/specials/heavies ever is somehow better in a game where you field dozens and dozens of them is even sillier.

And, if nothing else? That composition made it much easier to make legion bits to swap parts of the body, instead of just helmets and shoulder pads...

Oh no 1/5th of my guys have the same pose, that's so much worse that literally every single model having the same "pooped his pants" pose.

People like to give the Heresy community gak for being "rivet counters" and "purists," but I have never experienced the amount of whinging on model posing in all my time as I have since GW made HH a mainline store-supported system.

People would rock up with armies built from bits scavenged and scrounged from every single person they knew, or spend £200 on 20 models for one troop slot.

You've got a big room in a 4-star hotel with breakfast included, and you're complaining it's not a suite at the Ritz.

 Gert wrote:
Oh no 1/5th of my guys have the same pose, that's so much worse that literally every single model having the same "pooped his pants" pose.

It's true - the ONLY leg pose available in multi-pose kits is the power squat. /s

well, at least the resin bitz could be "re-posed" by heating up the resin parts. Took some skill no doubt but I bet it was a heckova lot easier than trying to do plastic surgery to the existing stuff.

I personally feel like the multiparts were a better choice, but I do admit I much prefer the modern proportions, so its a wash

Speaking of the new rules on show, this might actually get me playing HH3. The changes make it a whole new game instead of just tired ol 7th edition with some more stuff in it. But flock if I'm still going to buy any books this time

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Gert wrote:
Oh no 1/5th of my guys have the same pose, that's so much worse that literally every single model having the same "pooped his pants" pose.

It's true - the ONLY leg pose available in multi-pose kits is the power squat. /s

That above is the reason why literally now means figuratively in english.

But hey, I'm sure there was no other way whatsoever and it could only have been either "all powersquat all day" and "these very same five poses forever and ever, but with even more parts, because you like puzzles".

THE ONLY TWO POSSIBLE WAYS EVER I SAY

I really don't see the issue with desiring a bit more variety, as if not wanting the same 5 poses over and over again on a high model count game is some how some kind of diva-esque attitude. To those that claim to prefer having the same 5 poses on repeat, I'm happy for you for having gotten what you think is best.

I think the actual alternative is a 40k-grade kit with 10 distinct sculpts and I am honestly a little offended that chaff like GSC Neophytes can have a 3-frame sprue of 10 poses, with 2 choices of gun for everyone , plus command and specialist stuff, all there, but the "third main game" gets its core infantry on 5-body half-sprues and everything else is a paid addon.

Emperor's Children got the 5 pose treatment, as have every Primaris unit that is in 5-10 man configuration.

I don't think we've seen the sprues for the new Space Wolves, but it appears that its a 5 man sprue each for Blood Claws and Grey Hunters as well.

It's not just HH that got the 5 poses.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I think the actual alternative is a 40k-grade kit with 10 distinct sculpts and I am honestly a little offended that chaff like GSC Neophytes can have a 3-frame sprue of 10 poses, with 2 choices of gun for everyone , plus command and specialist stuff, all there, but the "third main game" gets its core infantry on 5-body half-sprues and everything else is a paid addon.

For reals. That GSC kit is amazing.

The gsc kit is "peak" GW...its almost like they cared and then...didn't

 skrulnik wrote:
Emperor's Children got the 5 pose treatment, as have every Primaris unit that is in 5-10 man configuration.

I don't think we've seen the sprues for the new Space Wolves, but it appears that its a 5 man sprue each for Blood Claws and Grey Hunters as well.

It's not just HH that got the 5 poses.

But is it the exact same 5 poses in every kit? That's the issue with the HH marines. Wouldn't be an issue if the 5 poses were different from box to box.

Heaven forbid, that GW make marginally less profit on each box of miniatures by not duplicating sprues.