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.

I was thinking about it, and looking at the sprue for a Cadian box, and a thought occured to me. How well do you think a single clam pack upgrade of female faces and torsos would sell?

It wouldnt. Because buying a exlsive clam pack for cosmetics that dont even distiguish youe army as being a part of a different sub faction is unlikely to be worth its high cost.

They need to just add some female torsos and heads into a uodated box of the basic kit.

There's already some high quality female Guardsmen from third party sellers, they seem to do pretty well.

There are plenty of 3rd party companies making resin female IG heads, so it obviously makes some money. I'm not sure if it makes enough money for a plastic mold.

I'm hoping that they release one or more new* plastic regiments, and that there are plenty of female models in them. I would guess there would be a pretty big demand for them. I've just been buying LRBTs and not infantry for the past couple years because I don't want any more of the current infantry.
*New in the sense of models. New plastic versions of classic Regiments would definitely be welcome.

My intuition tells me that it wouldn't do at least as well as some of the Forgeworld Chapter Upgrade packs. However, considering that they've been cancelling a bunch of those recently, that also tells me that this is "not enough" sales for GW to want to do it. I'm with Lance - I think female Guardsmen should just be a part of the regular sprue. I'm eternally hopeful that the next time they release a Guardsman sprue, they just throw in the female guardsmen at that time. Female guardsmen have become an increasingly large part of the fluff, and I'd love to see the men and women of the Astra Militarum fighting the nightmares of the 41st millennium side by side.

"How much money would female gaurdsmen make?"

Only 70% of what a male Guardsman makes. Even in the year 41,000 the patriarchy is still keeping women down.

Unfortunately it's a no-win situation for GW if they decide to make them.

They'll be called sexist for making them an upgrade pack instead of their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for making them their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for continuing to sell the male models instead of replacing them with the female models.
They'll be called sexist for allowing players to shoot and kill female models.
They'll be called sexist if they make them "attractive".
They'll be called sexist if they make them "ugly".

The only winning move is not to play.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unfortunately it's a no-win situation for GW if they decide to make them.

They'll be called sexist for making them an upgrade pack instead of their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for making them their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for continuing to sell the male models instead of replacing them with the female models.
They'll be called sexist for allowing players to shoot and kill female models.

Nah, you can totally just ignore people who say ridiculous things like that.

meleti wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unfortunately it's a no-win situation for GW if they decide to make them.

They'll be called sexist for making them an upgrade pack instead of their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for making them their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for continuing to sell the male models instead of replacing them with the female models.
They'll be called sexist for allowing players to shoot and kill female models.

Nah, you can totally just ignore people who say ridiculous things like that.

Yeah, I agree with meleti. The number of people who would call them sexist for most of the above things would likely be inconsequential.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unfortunately it's a no-win situation for GW if they decide to make them.

They'll be called sexist for making them an upgrade pack instead of their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for making them their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for continuing to sell the male models instead of replacing them with the female models.
They'll be called sexist for allowing players to shoot and kill female models.
They'll be called sexist if they make them "attractive".
They'll be called sexist if they make them "ugly".

The only winning move is not to play.

I've been using IG made from Victoria Miniature bits, and have had no real issues from anyone about any of these, particularly the last three you listed. Hell, even the club's resident feminist thought they were cool, and had no issues with shooting at them.

Seventy cents on the dollar?... I'll get my coat.

To be honest I'd much rather like to see full kits or upgrade sprues for valhallans, mordians, armageddons, vostroyans and tallarns. Mind you they can have any variation of men and women in them for all I care.

I came into this thread expecting someone to be ramting about a wage gap between male and female troops. Honestly kind of disappointed.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unfortunately it's a no-win situation for GW if they decide to make them.

They'll be called sexist for making them an upgrade pack instead of their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for making them their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for continuing to sell the male models instead of replacing them with the female models.
They'll be called sexist for allowing players to shoot and kill female models.
They'll be called sexist if they make them "attractive".
They'll be called sexist if they make them "ugly".

The only winning move is not to play.

I don't know if you're trying to be funny, but if not, I think you're demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding either of what sexism *is*, or the reasons why people take issue with it.

BaconCatBug has a nasty habit of only posting things that are wrong, you'd be best off ignoring him.

There's obviously a market for female guardsmen models since third parties with much less capital than GW are making a profit off of them.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
BaconCatBug has a nasty habit of only posting things that are wrong, you'd be best off ignoring him.

There's obviously a market for female guardsmen models since third parties with much less capital than GW are making a profit off of them.

While there is a market we don't know if there's enough demand to justify the outlay of molds for plastic. The most likely outcome is that they'll just add additional torsos and heads to give people the option to make some female guard if they redo the existing kit. It is possible that if there's enough visible demand forge world might do some sort of upgrade kit though. But unless GW is sure it's going to make considerable profit they won't bother with making new molds unless they were already making a new kit. They'd be less concerned over the vocal minorities praising or condemning them about releasing female guard than they would be the projected profits.

To take the question literally:

In the Ciaphes Cain novels, he serves with a mixed gender regiment, and it implies that all guards are paid the same, based on rank.

25 Schmeckles.

 Nazrak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unfortunately it's a no-win situation for GW if they decide to make them.

They'll be called sexist for making them an upgrade pack instead of their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for making them their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for continuing to sell the male models instead of replacing them with the female models.
They'll be called sexist for allowing players to shoot and kill female models.
They'll be called sexist if they make them "attractive".
They'll be called sexist if they make them "ugly".

The only winning move is not to play.

I don't know if you're trying to be funny, but if not, I think you're demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding either of what sexism *is*, or the reasons why people take issue with it.

Yeah not like the far left ever do stuff like this, I mean you'd never see a woman driven away from a movie for not being trans...

This is exactly the kind of response they'd get, fekke sake look at peta and their stupid complaints about plastic fur on sisters.

hobojebus wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Unfortunately it's a no-win situation for GW if they decide to make them.

They'll be called sexist for making them an upgrade pack instead of their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for making them their own kit.
They'll be called sexist for continuing to sell the male models instead of replacing them with the female models.
They'll be called sexist for allowing players to shoot and kill female models.
They'll be called sexist if they make them "attractive".
They'll be called sexist if they make them "ugly".

The only winning move is not to play.

I don't know if you're trying to be funny, but if not, I think you're demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding either of what sexism *is*, or the reasons why people take issue with it.

Yeah not like the far left ever do stuff like this, I mean you'd never see a woman driven away from a movie for not being trans...

This is exactly the kind of response they'd get, fekke sake look at peta and their stupid complaints about plastic fur on sisters.

The mad men, they actually did it. I thought it was just a joke around my store.

They could put female or female looking models in to starter sets. With snap fit models it is way easier to add stuff to a model range. A full box of female IG would have to to have some really powerful rules to beat out catachans.

Since woman look functionally the same in PPE it would be pointless as a singular sprue, no long hair, no defining feature other than height, the webbing breaks up the hips so you can’t even see that, so unless people want an exaggerated version of woman so it’s noticable on a 28mm mini, I don’t see the point.

Now a few heads thrown onto the existing sprue with no helm could work.

please do not attach non wargaming images to dakka.
Reds8n

for RPG purposes I think they could sell well, after all AoS and 40k have RPGs coming out that the minis will work great with,.

Karol wrote:
They could put female or female looking models in to starter sets. With snap fit models it is way easier to add stuff to a model range. A full box of female IG would have to to have some really powerful rules to beat out catachans.

Well see now you've just got me wanting a box of female Catachans.

Wouldn't the models be been kind of a sexist. The old catachans look like what like avarge people that rule on a beach look like as far as men go. For female catachans they would have to go all out roid monster, or something like that.

They'd sell very well initially and then plateau to ok. I suppose like most kits!

There's be some people making all female Guard armies but they would be the minority. Quite a lot of people would buy a kit to sprinkle through an existing army though.

Karol wrote:
Wouldn't the models be been kind of a sexist. The old catachans look like what like avarge people that rule on a beach look like as far as men go. For female catachans they would have to go all out roid monster, or something like that.

depends how you interpret them. Catachans have long been said to be essentially visually based off "80s action heros" it might be a challanfge to do that with women though, but generally speaking female action heros teeeeeend not to be as ripped as male ones.

vaklor4 wrote:I was thinking about it, and looking at the sprue for a Cadian box, and a thought occured to me. How well do you think a single clam pack upgrade of female faces and torsos would sell?

As a single clampack with a head and a torso, probably not well, as a stopgap "upgrade sprue" compatible with all the human sized characters? I can see that. After all, if it fits say Tempestus Scions, it means just a little work makes it fit a Cadian, or a Genestealer Neophyte, etc. I know I have spent a decent amount of money on just getting nice looking female heads for my guard (I used some heads from the Dreamforge Panzerjager box, and bought a whole bunch of heads from Statuesque).

Lance845 wrote:It wouldnt. Because buying a exlsive clam pack for cosmetics that dont even distiguish youe army as being a part of a different sub faction is unlikely to be worth its high cost.

They need to just add some female torsos and heads into a uodated box of the basic kit.

For a person in combat gear, you really don't even need to go so far as torsos - maybe if they are adding a female Catachan, but otherwise just a number of heads would work. I wouldn't say no to it mind you, but I'd personally rather 20+ unique looking heads over 10 heads and 10 torsos.

Morgasm the Powerfull wrote:To be honest I'd much rather like to see full kits or upgrade sprues for valhallans, mordians, armageddons, vostroyans and tallarns. Mind you they can have any variation of men and women in them for all I care.

Of those, only Mordian would really even need much beyond a headswap to make it female - Valhallans, Steel Legion, Vostroyan, and Tallan all have fairly bulky clothing on that would hide the features all but the most women. Mordian though, they would need unique female torsos do to the specially tailored clothing aesthetic they have.

BrianDavion wrote:

Karol wrote:
Wouldn't the models be been kind of a sexist. The old catachans look like what like avarge people that rule on a beach look like as far as men go. For female catachans they would have to go all out roid monster, or something like that.

depends how you interpret them. Catachans have long been said to be essentially visually based off "80s action heros" it might be a challanfge to do that with women though, but generally speaking female action heros teeeeeend not to be as ripped as male ones.

I'm imagining an entire squad of Ellen Ripleys, basically.

For Cadians it really only should be a head swap. A sprue of 10 slightly more feminine heads with helmets and like 2 without helmets would do it.

The bodies are fine, you can't tell the gender through the flakk armour. In fact, I'd be a little pissed with GW if they made boob flakk armour!

 Arachnofiend wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Karol wrote:
Wouldn't the models be been kind of a sexist. The old catachans look like what like avarge people that rule on a beach look like as far as men go. For female catachans they would have to go all out roid monster, or something like that.

depends how you interpret them. Catachans have long been said to be essentially visually based off "80s action heros" it might be a challanfge to do that with women though, but generally speaking female action heros teeeeeend not to be as ripped as male ones.

I'm imagining an entire squad of Ellen Ripleys, basically.

they could introduce them in an expansion to Space Hulk