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 sculpts look nice. Have folks posted scale/size comparisons with terminators and/or primaris? Just looking at them, they seem like they'd be good standins for the bigger Starship Trooper Mobile Infantry exosuits (Cougar and Grizzly I think were the names).

They're up on minicompare!

https://minicompare.info/?terran-marine-scmg0012-b-shield=&intercessor-a-sergeant=&deathwing-terminator-2023-sergeant=

Mate’s work continues, with a nice close up of some leg.

As he doesn’t have any painted Maureens, here’s next to an Escher.

 Ashiraya wrote:
They're up on minicompare!

https://minicompare.info/?terran-marine-scmg0012-b-shield=&intercessor-a-sergeant=&deathwing-terminator-2023-sergeant=

Thanks and I'll take a look. There used to be a great minis site that just put the assembled minis in front of a ruler alongside some similar genre/style/scale figs going back 10+ years ago but it's long gone. It had a very obvious name that matched the intent but I can't recall it after all these years.

edit: Very cool and thanks! Definitely exactly what I was looking for.

I don’t have WIPs, but I’ve got a couple Zerg units painted up in my B&M thread.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/818697.page

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Mate’s work continues, with a nice close up of some leg.

Okay, the moulding looks better in this photo than in some of the promotional photos. This guy would be easy to drybrush. Interesting...

There will be a printed rulebook?

I think they’re planning a printed rulebook in the future after they’ve made sure the rules they’ve got now are solid enough.

 Overread wrote:
I was under the impression that they'd still have a 2P starter but no founders edition with the named hero.

That said firms do seem to flip-flop on the actual value of a 2p starter set. On the one hand they can be good to get new people in; on the other (as GW shows) often as not the big buyers are established fans after cheap models.

Esp when two people often want two specific armies and that doesn't necessarily mean the two in the 2p starter.

So having "starter" sets that just have everything one person needs and nothing else can be of more value. There's no need to "trade away" one half or have one person not get the army they want .

You need a 2-Player starter set to pass the Christmas morning test. I.e. everything you need to play the game on Christmas morning right after you unwrap the game.

 Easy E wrote:
[
You need a 2-Player starter set to pass the Christmas morning test. I.e. everything you need to play the game on Christmas morning right after you unwrap the game.

I feel like this test was wildly overblown as a marketing thing and never really panned out. Especially since it also included the assumption that everything had to come pre-assembled.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
[
You need a 2-Player starter set to pass the Christmas morning test. I.e. everything you need to play the game on Christmas morning right after you unwrap the game.

I feel like this test was wildly overblown as a marketing thing and never really panned out. Especially since it also included the assumption that everything had to come pre-assembled.

Also, a game based on IP that was last particularly relevant over a decade ago is probably not aimed at little timmy playing it Christmas morning under the Christmas tree. I wouldn't be surprised to see a 2 player set come out at some point, but I think individual starter sets (especially where there are three factions, so one (and only one) would get left out of the two player set) are a good idea. Would be interesting to see the data on sales behind Battlefronts 2 player sets vs thier army starter boxes.

It's always tricky because also when you've only got 3 factions in a game that is based on a franchise where many players will have connected with all 3 factions before - it almost doesn't matter if one is left out because a lot of people will want all 3.

Which is where the water gets muddied; plus we can't overlook that there's a whole body of data of swaps and trades that isn't easy to monitor. Esp since a lot of it will happen at the local level

How many of those 2 player starter sets are bought by 1 person who swaps with another so they get "double" one half. And thus would have been equally served (if not better served) as customers with a single faction starter offering the same boons just with a single faction instead of 2.

Also lets consider production sides - is it cheaper for firms to have one complicated starter set with loads of moving parts (models, rules, tokens, dice, etc) over having multiple sets; each one complicated with a myriad of parts.

There's also the upfront cost where a single starter sells like mad, but likely requires less production over having each faction.






Also its probably a hard discussion for most Dakka fans to engage with because we aren't newbies. Even with a brand new wargame in the market, we are old-hands and established customers of wargaming in general. The years where a 2p starter set was exciting outside of "being cheaper than retail on individual" is so far back in our past that we likely cannot recall the thought processes and drivers on joining into the game that we had back at that time. It could be something so utterly simple that having a single starter set simply creates a super easy guided purchase. You don't have to think "what faction" or get caught in a paralysis of "well I like 3 of them and I can't choose" - the staffer/fans just say "Get X" all the time and its always X because X is the big starter box with all the rules and tokens and stuff you need to play alongside a bunch of models.
It could also be that concepts of "decision paralysis" are overblown. That its a thing which happens and could lose sales, but that ultimately having multiple starters isn't as huge a barrier as one might theorize.

I think since the Miniatures are coloured plastic and they seem to be much more robust and thick then 40k this is rather aimed at non wargamers.
So they want to attract the Starcraft crowd craving for new Starcraft stuff.

I think one of the things GW has absolutely got right (and they have been copied by almost everyone in the industry) is the 2P 'everything you need to play in one box' starter sets. If you see the interviews with Rick Priestley, Jervis, Andy Chambers etc. speaking about that time they say they recognised that box as the jumping on point for the game, and the first editions of 40k and Fantasy had missed that. And we must assume it has been a success because they have never really deviated from that formula.

So for this game not to have that you have to say would be an outlier, and I think a poor choice.

And even if we aren't newbies or teenagers posting here who want to jump in with just one faction, there will be plenty of dads who played the video game when younger, buying this set to play with their sons or daughters.

The boardgaming hobby is huge these days, and for the product to have any cross-appeal with that group, the box needs to have a game in it. (Although no printed rulebook seems to also break that, if I'm reading it right).

I think that's just a practicality of not printing a rulebook that's invalid in 2 weeks of mass user playtesting.