PDA

View Full Version : Quality of GW product.



Rydmend
15-01-2010, 14:29
I think GW has been releasing some of the best models out of any miniature range on the market recently. The Lizardmen were great, the new tyranids have very nice models, skaven, new legion of the damned, and even the mostly whole black reach and space hulk models are done to an excellent standard.

I know we pay a premium for GW models but I sort of feel they are justified, they provide product that not many other companies can compete with. One would be hard pressed to find another company with such a diverse and excellent array of models.

On top of the sculpt quality we have vast and rich universe for both warhammer and 40k, Black library fluff, huge gaming community, a robust rule system, Forge world side releases, and a large slection of paints and modeling supplies and you really see that GW is its own kind of beast.

Master Jeridian
15-01-2010, 14:30
Agreed, I can't fault GW on their current plastic model production.
The majority are very detailed and top quality, with increasing variety in bits included- and importantly consistent.

Succurso
15-01-2010, 14:35
I would not fault the quality of the plastic offerings from GW. They are a joy (usually) to work with and offer great scope for the modeller.

However I recently was given a Venerable Dreadnaught for christmas and I was less than impressed with the quality of the moulding. Dont get me wrong the detail levels were great. But in terms of constructing the model it was very poor. I spent many hours trying to get the minature to sit correctly together and ended up using a fairly large quantity of greenstuff in order to fill gaps etc. This was the first metal model that I had recieved in many years and to be honest I think I will try and stay with plastic in future. Especially with large multi part models.

Petay1985
15-01-2010, 14:52
I would not fault the quality of the plastic offerings from GW. They are a joy (usually) to work with and offer great scope for the modeller.

My thoughts exactly :cool:

rb.uhs
15-01-2010, 14:57
Agreed on all this, but I don't see how it is 40k specific.

shadow hunter
15-01-2010, 16:29
I would have agreed on all this until the new Beastmen pics were released. They are gopping.

Why they struggle to make nice Minotaurs, I dont know.

Come to think of it, I dont like hardly any ogre type models (including the 40K guard ogryns)

eltanko
15-01-2010, 16:33
I agree that the newest mini's are superbly detailed, and offer way more conversion options etc. But I still also believe that they are expensive!!

ElTanko

IronNerd
15-01-2010, 17:33
I have absolutely no complaints about the quality of GW minis. They are (for the most part at least) utterly amazing. Added to that, the 40k universe was the best idea ever... wonderful IP.

All that being said, I'm getting tired of some of GW's crap. They are a miniatures company first and foremost, sure. Would it kill them to hire people who care about making the game better? They are creeping a little too close to the line of "We are a big company, we don't care what you think" for my tastes...

New Cult King
15-01-2010, 17:38
I just wish the mold lines weren't so prevalent. That's my biggest bugbear.

Bunnahabhain
15-01-2010, 17:39
Do Gw have good quality products?

Models, yes.
Most of the sculpts, yes.
The rules, No!

Dangersaurus
15-01-2010, 17:52
I can fault their Crisis suits. It's better than it was last year (when there were large funnels in the head, fusion, side of engine, and multitracker of EVERY crisis suit, even replacements), but they're still not fully filling the mold.

Tonberry
15-01-2010, 17:55
Has anyone bought a tactical squad recently? The legs are horribly cast; massive mould lines all the way down, which cut through detail on the legs like the purity seals, and the two halves aren't quite in line on either side of the mould line.

Not cool.

Max Jet
15-01-2010, 17:58
How many of you have bought model kits from REAL Companies (no .. not heller, Airfix or Revell but professional kits from Trumpeter, Dragon or Tamyia) ?
GW Plastik kits are decent. Not great.
Mould lines, displacements of the parts, lack of details (whoever says "What?" now proves that he has never touched an infantry box of Dragon, preferably the soviet infantry sitting on a tank where even the texture of their clothings has been added).
However they offer the best fantasy model kits I have seen, but model kits all around? Hell no..

Archangel_Ruined
15-01-2010, 18:41
I was going to say something similar to Max Jet. The infantry that GW produce really are fantastic, I can't think of another company who come close to the options and variety across the range that GW offer. When it comes to vehicles I'm afraid GW are still in the dark ages yet charge more than Dragon or Italia do for their comparable 1:35 ranges. As said above, if you've ever had the joy of assembling a professional 1:35 tank kit it shows up what GW can do, 20 for a chimera vs 11 for a Trumpeter BMP, I know where the quality lies. That said, GW couldn't chase a young fanbase with models that complex, maybe that's where the real problem lies.

Loki73
15-01-2010, 18:56
Yup the new SW plastics are the Bees knees! I was getting tired of GeeDub bashing threeds.

MajorWesJanson
15-01-2010, 19:10
While GW models are not as detailed as say Tamyia, they are not meant to be display models. GW models are gaming minis, made to suffer frequent handling and movement. They trade detail for more durability and utility on the table. I'd love to see a Tamyia Baneblade, but would hate to play with one.

Venerable Dreads are a holdover from the metal dreadnoughts, which are a pain to assemble. Fortunately they are getting replaced in March.

Many of the newer sets really are amazing, both in the detail and in the sprue layouts, packing bits extremely densely. Compare a Fire Warrior sprue to the Wolf Pack sprue. Progress is great.

Archangel_Ruined
15-01-2010, 19:13
It is true that the metal venerable dread is a relic, I can't see why anyone would buy it over the forgeworld model at the same price. If you're willing to struggle to put the thing together you may as well pick the prettier model...

Lord Malorne
15-01-2010, 19:14
Do Gw have good quality products?

Models, yes.
Most of the sculpts, yes.
The rules, No!

Agree 100%.

Lord Malorne

Ronin_eX
15-01-2010, 20:42
Meh, GW does okay but they have long since been equalled and surpassed in product quality by smaller companies. A lot of their plastics have massive mold line issues, their metals are pretty poor quality and more and more since '99 they have been equating detail with what I would consider "busy".

A lot of their minis (metal mostly) are fairly static or awkwardly posed and over-decorated to the point that you wonder if they know how to do subtle details anymore.

They are still good minis but I think they get altogether too much hype that was only deserved in the late 90's. Now they are fairly standard as far as mini quality goes. Not the worst out there but not close to the best by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly their metals aren't worth the $13-$20 they charge for each of them though at least the plastics a a good deal.


Venerable Dreads are a holdover from the metal dreadnoughts

The original metal dreads (that came more than a decade before the new venerable) were actually great to assemble (still have mine). I don't see how you can consider the metal venerable a holdover from the first metal dreads that preceded its creation by over a decade. All told it is a relatively new sculpt that came out long after the first plastic dread hit the market.

AndrewGPaul
15-01-2010, 21:37
It is true that the metal venerable dread is a relic, I can't see why anyone would buy it over the forgeworld model at the same price.

Same price? FW venerable dreadnought with arms is 40, Citadel one is 35.

Archangel_Ruined
15-01-2010, 23:46
5, how much nicer is the forgeworld one? With the weapon loadout you actually want? That's worth more than a fiver in my book.

EmperorEternalXIX
15-01-2010, 23:56
The Space Wolves sprues are mind-bogglingly perfect. The pegs that hold the shoulder pads onto the sprues clip away super-cleanly and are very tiny; I haven't had to shave a mold line off a single space wolf leg in almost all my kits. That, and each kit comes with hundreds of optional parts and wargear -- all in one box, for the same price as the lifeless tactical squad box that is missing about 70% of its options.

They have come a long way and personally, with regard to gaming miniatures (not all modeling overall, mind you) I think no one holds a candle to their models.

TheDarkDuke
16-01-2010, 01:13
There quality have been very good as far as im concerned. That was until the beastmen were shown...... they alone have made me lose alot of respect for there quality if they can release those epic failures.

Freakiq
16-01-2010, 01:18
There quality have been very good as far as im concerned. That was until the beastmen were shown...... they alone have made me lose alot of respect for there quality if they can release those epic failures.

The style of the sculpts is not a quality issue but one of stylistic choice, which unlike quality is entirely subjective.

Alikar
16-01-2010, 01:59
Personally I believe that while their models are good, they could easily spend more money on their rules books. Can we please have full color? Basically every other major company does it. Why not GW?

Wintermute
16-01-2010, 02:23
I've moved this thread to Other GW Discussion.

BTW the discussion of prices and pricing ends now. Any more posts which mention prices/pricing will be removed and may result in warnings being issued.

Wintermute

Suicide Messiah
16-01-2010, 14:59
The style of the sculpts is not a quality issue but one of stylistic choice, which unlike quality is entirely subjective.

Poor design and modelling are not style. The bestmen are done in the GW style, same as everything else they make. Clean, simplified details, oversized weapons, skulls etc.

There is no way anyone can say the new minotaurs are good or even acceptable. They are just poor sculpts, regardless of personal taste.

TheDarkDuke
16-01-2010, 15:18
Poor design and modelling are not style. The bestmen are done in the GW style, same as everything else they make. Clean, simplified details, oversized weapons, skulls etc.

There is no way anyone can say the new minotaurs are good or even acceptable. They are just poor sculpts, regardless of personal taste.

100% agree with you, however the razorgor is even worse then the minos sadly

EmperorNorton
16-01-2010, 15:54
I think most of their plastic kits are great, although I have to admit that I have no experience with the other model companies mentioned earlier.
Exception to this are the Empire State Troops, which aren't only questionable sculpts, but have also poor casting quality, in my experience at least, with lots of mould lines (even more than usual) and faint details.

The quality of a lot of the larger metal kits I have built was poor, with parts hardly fitting or not fitting at all, often warped to the point where a lot of resculpting was necessary.

And I second the point about their rules, which leave a lot to be desired.

EDIT: One thing I forgot is the Fantasy Basing Kit, as I got one of these in the mail today.
The resin pieces included in this set are of a bad qualitly, especially the square pieces, which I suppose are meant to be glued on top of a base to make a scenic base. All of them I got have a thick piece of surplus resin on the bottom, which will be a pain to remove and the process will likely cause damage to the scenic part. Also, all of them are warped, meaning they won't rest flatly on the base they are applied to, which renders them borderline useless.

swordwind
17-01-2010, 17:42
Got a box of Perry's new plastic Wars of the Roses infantry. They blow GW's stuff out of the water.

vladsimpaler
17-01-2010, 18:10
Got a box of Perry's new plastic Wars of the Roses infantry. They blow GW's stuff out of the water.
AND they're cheaper. :p

lanrak
17-01-2010, 21:20
Hi .
Perry Minatures are the bechmark to judge all others by IMO.
They produce exellent minatures at very competative prices.
15 for 32 to 36 infantry or 15 cavalry!

My favorite minature manufacturer by FAR!;)

Wintermute
17-01-2010, 21:29
If this thread continues to discuss pricing, I'll close it.

Wintermute

BobtheInquisitor
17-01-2010, 21:37
There is no way anyone can say the new minotaurs are good or even acceptable. They are just poor sculpts, regardless of personal taste.

I can say that they are great sculpts and keep a straight face. The problem is that they aren't very good minotaurs. But they are great daemons. They really look messed up, like a parody of biological life, which is perfect for something spawned by the warp. Also, I have an irresistible urge to convert one into a Cyberdemon.


Got a box of Perry's new plastic Wars of the Roses infantry. They blow GW's stuff out of the water.


Do they have the same amount of options and pose-ablility as GW plastic sets? I'm a converter and a modeller, and the last few Perry kits I've bought have been pretty darn light on the options with almost no opportunities to create new poses without serious conversion work. If their WOTR stuff has multiple arms, heads and weapons, I'll be all over it.

Mart007
17-01-2010, 21:57
How is this better than the GW range?

http://media.photobucket.com/image/perry%20miniatures/GilesAllison/IMG_0277.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_tw2oXaxtZtU/SZ8KDGx-luI/AAAAAAAAALM/-r-cDu2Lpd4/s320/Plastic%2520Riflemen.jpg

I m not saying they are bad and in no way am I saying the perry twins suck, but come on, im a vet player (and I dont GW bash - wow), and I can say GW are the nuts on minis no doubt. The detail is awesome for the most part. The new beastmen do suck, but it is subjective... as the moulding prosess is the same as it would be if they rocked. Someone approved the style and hey presto they were moulded. I wish they could pick a style for WFB, I thought they were moving to a more cinematic theme. The range doesent match up - WFB wise....

neXus6
18-01-2010, 00:52
It is a little difficult to compare quality when you aren't allowed to discuss pricing as the two are very much linked as a benchmark for comparison but I'll struggle on.

I have no real preference between plastic or metal models therefore I am quite happy to discuss across that divide, GW plastics are pretty good but do often suffer from horrific mould line problems, their metals tend to suffer from the same thing and on metals it is a much bigger problem.

There are many companies who produce metal models which not only far surpass GW's metal range for quality but in terms of detail, mould lines, and other such "quality" based aspects they overtake GWs plastics too.

With the block on price discussion I can't really make my point properly as that is needed to validate my comparison between other companies metals and GWs plastics but all in all while GWs miniatures are okay they do take a hell of a lot of preparation to get looking right.

vladsimpaler
18-01-2010, 00:59
How is this better than the GW range?

http://media.photobucket.com/image/perry%20miniatures/GilesAllison/IMG_0277.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_tw2oXaxtZtU/SZ8KDGx-luI/AAAAAAAAALM/-r-cDu2Lpd4/s320/Plastic%2520Riflemen.jpg

I m not saying they are bad and in no way am I saying the perry twins suck, but come on, im a vet player (and I dont GW bash - wow), and I can say GW are the nuts on minis no doubt. The detail is awesome for the most part. The new beastmen do suck, but it is subjective... as the moulding prosess is the same as it would be if they rocked. Someone approved the style and hey presto they were moulded. I wish they could pick a style for WFB, I thought they were moving to a more cinematic theme. The range doesent match up - WFB wise....

Check out the Perry War of the Roses:
http://www.warlordgames.co.uk/?p=3728 (Note that these are 3-ups, there is also the standard 28mm which is also depicted, but not painted)

Then compare them to any Empire/Brettonian plastics/metals. Oh, and keep in mind that you can get like 40 of them for GBP 15!

Crazy Harborc
18-01-2010, 02:18
Um, I seem to recall that the Perry brothers have been making/creating minies for GW for decades. SOooo does that mean those GW brand minies made/created/designed by the Perry brothers don't count when compared to Perry Miniatures....or vice versa?

neXus6
18-01-2010, 02:45
This isn't a discussion about miniature sculpting and design though, it is about product quality.

The Perrys have since setting up their own company been producing, as far as I can tell, a higher quality final product compared to GW.

I don't know about the casters used by the Perrys, I assume they don't do it themselves but I could be wrong.

The Ginger Ninja
18-01-2010, 04:13
However I recently was given a Venerable Dreadnaught for christmas and I was less than impressed with the quality of the moulding. Dont get me wrong the detail levels were great. But in terms of constructing the model it was very poor. I spent many hours trying to get the minature to sit correctly together and ended up using a fairly large quantity of greenstuff in order to fill gaps etc. This was the first metal model that I had recieved in many years and to be honest I think I will try and stay with plastic in future. Especially with large multi part models.
I brought a nightbringer a while ago, i also had trouble assembling it and had to use greenstuff, one of my friends Venerable dreadnoughts assembled poorly as well. I think its just (mostly, probably a few exceptions)the large metal miniatures that don't assemble well and a few of the smaller ones that belong to unloved races

ICLRK625
18-01-2010, 08:21
I brought a nightbringer a while ago, i also had trouble assembling it and had to use greenstuff, one of my friends Venerable dreadnoughts assembled poorly as well. I think its just (mostly, probably a few exceptions)the large metal miniatures that don't assemble well and a few of the smaller ones that belong to unloved races

Try buying a Scrap Launcher or Steam Tank, both are nightmares, requiring extensive modelling work in some cases.

tu33y
18-01-2010, 08:46
i am pretty much awed by the sudden increase in model detail- the IG command sprues are just so nice to look at i dont wanna cut stuff out from them...

BUT

the metal Ent makes me cry a little inside... it really does seem to reek of "oh *&^% it- that will do.."

Suicide Messiah
18-01-2010, 09:49
This isn't a discussion about miniature sculpting and design though, it is about product quality.

sculpting and design directly affect product quality. Moreso than the quality of the casting infact (thats assuming the cast is reasonable).

The Perrys historical ranges are actually of lower quality than their GW work, with details often being rough or soft. Compare their WotR range to the Empire or Bret ranges they did years ago. The twins are great sculptors but the GW is their day job and obviously takes precedence.

spaint2k
18-01-2010, 09:57
I think GW has been releasing some of the best models out of any miniature range on the market recently.

Which other ranges have you been comparing them too?


That, and each kit comes with hundreds of optional parts and wargear -- all in one box, for the same price as the lifeless tactical squad box that is missing about 70% of its options.

Does it have a melta gun?

e2055261
18-01-2010, 10:20
You can't fault gw quality. I veteran gamer and I have no problem saying that the quality of gw models has improved drastically over the last 15-20 years. I've seen other model ranges and i believe they don't match gw for detail and ease of construction (on the whole).

That said there are good quality models to be found in the tamiya range, for sure - but they're are pretty expensive as well....

I guess it's the old adage you get what you pay for.

Danteng7
18-01-2010, 13:56
I would say GW is better in terms of the 40k Universe and maybe Fantasy world. I love the lore and environment in 40k, which I feel is one of the top sci-fi universe I've known. Most people I know like the 40k universe, even though they dont game or buy the minis.

In terms of model quality, Dragon and Tamiya are better as they actually replicate the real stuff as best as they could. Dragon is excellent in casting their plastic kits, their attention to details is second to none, and the kits are very value for money i feel. GW cant really find a Land Raider to study can they?

And its hard to use a Dragon or Tamiya static model for gaming, you will destroy a fine piece of work in no time. GW plastic are more robust in that sense.

Max1mum
18-01-2010, 14:07
I find interesting that all the models peopel can complain about in this thread
..are old metal models ;-)

And any complaints about those are instantly justified ;-). So don't worry about it, but those models are ancient and belong to a different era. The space marine venerable dread is a excellent example of a absolute horrible model by todays standards.

And as for the new plastics, some might be a bit priced a bit steaply ( goldswords goldigors ? ) But the quality is fantastic.

Griefbringer
18-01-2010, 16:01
The Perrys historical ranges are actually of lower quality than their GW work, with details often being rough or soft. Compare their WotR range to the Empire or Bret ranges they did years ago.

I have got the twins WotR plastic set, and I find it to be of very good quality. However, for comparing stuff, I prefer comparing like with like, so I would only compare them to other plastic kits - how many of those did the twins sculpt for Bretonnian and Empire ranges? The only sure one I can think is the Soldiers of Empire boxed set (which was also very good quality).

I will happily compare metal Perry WotR models to metal GW Perry models, once the former get released first.

spaint2k
18-01-2010, 16:32
I would humbly suggest that the OP has never seen these miniatures. He'd be hard-pressed to find ANYTHING in GW's range that comes close, they don't have pumpkin heads or ham fists and they're not festooned with insane amounts of skulls either.

Freakiq
18-01-2010, 17:05
I would humbly suggest that the OP has never seen these miniatures. He'd be hard-pressed to find ANYTHING in GW's range that comes close, they don't have pumpkin heads or ham fists and they're not festooned with insane amounts of skulls either.

This is like complaining that Mickey Mouse is flat when other companies release movies in 3D.

It's a stylistic choice, not a question of quality.

Radium
18-01-2010, 17:14
I would humbly suggest that the OP has never seen these miniatures. He'd be hard-pressed to find ANYTHING in GW's range that comes close, they don't have pumpkin heads or ham fists and they're not festooned with insane amounts of skulls either.

But what size are these and, more importantly: will these get massproduced in plastic?

spaint2k
18-01-2010, 17:14
This is like complaining that Mickey Mouse is flat when other companies release movies in 3D.

It's a stylistic choice, not a question of quality.

The OP flat out said that GW have been releasing "some of the best models out of any miniature range on the market" and "they provide product that not many other companies can compete with". I don't think the OP has researched his bold statement.

When you say quality I can think of two meanings. The first is quality from a production standpoint: is this model acceptable or should it be rejected? From a production standpoint, I think GW's quality is not that great. I regularly have mountainous mouldlines on both plastic and metal Citadel Miniatures and it's worse than any of the independent companies I've bought from in the last five years.

The second meaning of quality intrinsically talks about the stylistic choices the sculptor made when he did his work. I find it likely that no-one on this board would stand up and say "Lemartes is a fantastic miniature, that sculptor [Mike McVey, before he got good at it] did a bang-up job there!" Because basically, he didn't. Lemartes was crap, festooned with gigantic pieces of garbage that stuck out at unnatural angles from his unnaturally-posed body.

Now I'm not saying that Lemartes represents the pinnacle of quality in miniature design. But I am saying that plenty of other companies make awesome miniatures to rival (or better) anything that GW puts out.

And to conclude this rambling post, I've been buying GW's figures for 22 years; I'm a complete sucker for 40K. Nonetheless, the miniatures I posted above will get me into WWII gaming... just as soon as they're released. :(


But what size are these and, more importantly: will these get massproduced in plastic?

http://thunderboltmountain.com/serendipity/uploads/MP43.JPG

1/48 scale, to be produced in metal and resin. There will be three squads of each side in the initial release.

To pre-empt the plastic lovers, why would I want to cut these things up? They're already perfect. If the company releases three squads of completely individual models I can simply glue them up and start using them.

Lars Porsenna
18-01-2010, 18:38
And to conclude this rambling post, I've been buying GW's figures for 22 years; I'm a complete sucker for 40K. Nonetheless, the miniatures I posted above will get me into WWII gaming... just as soon as they're released.

Yeah, good luck with that. Since these figures were first announced, I got into, and subsequently left 1/48 scale modelling. It's been -- what? -- 4 years?

When they were announced, I would have bought the whole range, complete. Now, I don't have nearly as much interest (having bought figures that were actually available).

Damon.

simonr1978
18-01-2010, 20:46
In terms of model quality, Dragon and Tamiya are better as they actually replicate the real stuff as best as they could. Dragon is excellent in casting their plastic kits, their attention to details is second to none, and the kits are very value for money i feel. GW cant really find a Land Raider to study can they?

I really don't see what you're trying to say here. Dragon, Tamiya and pretty much any scale model company that's making model kits of real world equipment have to make sure that, within whatever they consider acceptable tolerances, their kits are the correct size, shape and have the correct equipment. That doesn't mean that they have an easier time of it over GW designers though, since it's usually very clear what is and isn't on a tank or plane and they have to find a way to represent the relevant parts on the model kit.

Compare that to GW designers who have basically carte blanche to design their tanks more or less as they wish without a second's consideration of real world limitations (The absurdly proportioned turret cannon on the Leman Russ being a good example of that) and if a bit of equipment can't be made to fit easily on the kit, who cares? It's not like anyone can actually go and visit a real Leman Russ in a museum.

Now, I wouldn't use a Dragon or Tamiya tank for wargaming simply down to their price tag, but I have seen Revell and Airfix tanks used for wargaming over a number of years with few if any problems and even these have levels of detail that are IMO easily the equal if not superior to GW's tank kits.

AndrewGPaul
18-01-2010, 23:34
Those Thunderbolt Mountain miniatures may be stuck in pre-release hell, but take a look at his fantasy miniatures. You may not like the style, but the proportions are spot-on, the faces look like, well, faces not caricatures, and he sculpts the most realistic fabrics I've ever seen on a miniature.

Mind you, he's had plenty of practice - he was Ral Partha's original sculptor, and IIRC has been sculpting for longer than Citadel Miniatures has existed. He was the one that introduced them the green stuff.

Vermin-thing
19-01-2010, 02:41
If anything comes close to GW in quality, I firmly think that mantic is on par, and the models for the game Infinity http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk/index.php?act=cat&cre=min-inf&sou=cat are almost better than some of the newer stuff. I think that GW should consider recutting, and repackage allot of it's range, mostly for fantasy. Case and point: HE spearmen, the only thing stopping me from making a spear/seaguard heavy army. I would pay more for better product, in other words, no inch thick mould lines, block hands/heads, and way to many parts for low quality models. HE probly wont be getting re done for another few years (6 or so), so what's stopping them from following through with many armies 2nd waves?

Instead of releasing the next edition of a popular army, take a month or two to get the rest of the lines up to par. Like really you gotta release the goldswords, and many many (over three) armies are missing their core models. :( I smell fail on the winds.

_toast_
19-01-2010, 03:09
Got a box of Perry's new plastic Wars of the Roses infantry. They blow GW's stuff out of the water.

Close... but no cigar ;) there is a bit of a quality difference between them. I found in my boxes that yes they were amazing models, the detail crispness wasn't as good. Most notable in the belts and swords. Perry minis also are more close to true scale meaning smaller parts, which i would imagine being harder to mold. That hasn't stopped me from ordering enough to field a huge empire army though :D

Night Bearer
19-01-2010, 03:30
GW seems hit or miss on a lot of their stuff. In some ways the Space Wolf plastics are better than the previous ones, but on the other hand a lot of their hairdos are just...odd looking to me. With the Beastmen, it's puzzling how great the Bestigors, Gors, and Ungors look, yet the Minos are terrible (I think the Razorgor is just suffering from really messed up sculpts and paint job of its eyes).

My main complaint with GW's minis is the amount of prep work they require. Their mold lines seem excessive compared to what other companies do. This, coupled with the amount of unnecessarily over-pieced kits (do Empire players really need separate torsos and legs? do SM/CSM torsos really need to be halved, given how thick a number of their plastics are?), really makes assembling a lot of GW's infantry kits a bit of a chore.

(And don't even get me started on trying to figure out who thought it was a good idea making most of the Bloodletters hold their over-sized swords horizontal for a unit needing to be ranked in WHFB!)

Also, while they've gotten a lot better at it, their plastics still seem "chunky" compared to their metal equivalents, especially with models that have large, relatively flat or smooth areas of armour.

Lars Porsenna
19-01-2010, 16:58
Re: mold lines. I just finished up rounding out my HE Swordmasters unit, buying 17 figures over the last month or two. I also have been filling out my Eldar buying a few figures here and there. I can't say I had any excessive mold lines. I just got the Fire Dragons Exarch, and the only mold line I really had to deal with was under the pointing arm. The Firelance needed a bit of clean-up, but no moreso than usual.

Similarly the Swordmasters needed cleanup in the usual areas (sides of helmet, feet), and that was it. I keep hearing about excessive moldlines, but I'm just not seeing it...

As for seperate torsos and legs: YES. This increases posability, and I don't really find it adds much more to the build process. OTOH, I have a different perspective on things too: as my "main" hobby is plastic model building (mostly armor), GW figure assembly is pretty trivial IMHO.

Damon.

Night Bearer
20-01-2010, 00:54
My personal experience is that I've had more issues with mold lines in GW's metals than with PP's metals, but by far my biggest issue with mold lines is with GW's plastics. More pieces = more mold lines, as each individual piece inevitably has its own mold line almost completely encompassing the bit.

My problem with trying to make rank and file troops more configurable is that, IMO, it's mostly meaningless.

Fex, an army of metal Valhallans vs an army of plastic Cadians. On the battlefield, there's just not that much significantly different between one army that's mostly composed of, what, 5-7 stock metal poses and one that's theoretically infinitely unique thanks to being multi-piece plastic. Obviously having tons of options can mean something more for officers and the like, but 50 rank and file plaggy Cadians are just as "different" and "unique" amongst each other as 50 random metal Valhallans. At a certain point (i.e. above skirmish-level) the ability to alter poses just doesn't matter, and 99% of the time 40k falls in the range where those extra poses are superfluous.

Unless you're wanting to add a significant amount of effort and time, there's really only a finite number of appreciable ways to pose a Space Marine, Guardsman, or Termagant. I don't mind doing conversions for character models, unique units (usually for "counts as" situations), etc., but for example with Space Marines, I don't see the point in having to do the following steps:

1. Glue front torso to back
2. Glue complete torso to legs
3. Glue arms to torso
4. Glue bolter to arms
5. Glue shoulder pads to arms
6. Glue head to torso
7. Glue backpack to torso

...if I can just get a "plug-and-play" Marine that only requires adding the bolter and backpack, something that gets you pretty much the exact same pose for a lot less effort. I'd rather have GW improve their mold lines and undercutting than on finding ways of making 5 different sets of arms that barely alter the angle of the boltgun.

I love painting, but assembly just kills me. GW plastics just eat away at my hobby time, especially as at least with painting I can still play, whereas there's no getting around the assembly, and anything that inflates the time it takes (mold lines, unnecessary assembly of things that should be one-piece or close to it) just kills my drive to buy and play GW games.

I've gotten back into WM, fex, I assembled a medium battleforce almost completely in a single night. The equivalent numbers of GW models (not in points but in physical # of models) takes me a heckuva lot longer. To me that's quality, because even with the amount of pinning I do for the warjacks, I don't feel like the assembly phase of my Warmachine hobby gets in the way of my painting or playing, whereas I constantly find myself wanting to start a GW army only to realize and be honest with myself that the assembly will just kill that initial drive.

To use a GW equivalent, prepping 10 Plague Censer Bearers is a heckuva lot easier and quicker for me than 10 (plastic) Plague Monks. One-piece metals vs. four-piece plastics (five if you include the separate scrolls on the monk staffs). Lots of mold line scraping on those monks, it just killed off my interest in a Skaven army when I tried it a few years back.

Over the years, I've bought a lot of GW models in that "initially hopeful and optimistic" phase of starting an army, before I finally just stopped doing it. Now I may buy a handful of GW models a year - things that I want to paint, that's it - because I know I'm otherwise justing wasting money on stuff I'll never finish.

To me that's a quality issue - "quality" not necessarily in the sense of being good or junky materials, but "quality" in the sense that there's an inherent aspect of GW's models (excessive assembly mold cleaning) that takes enough away from my enjoyment that I end up feeling like I've wasted money (not a pricing complaint - it kills my interest regardless of how cheap or expensive the model).

YMMV of course!

Lars Porsenna
20-01-2010, 01:26
YMMV indeed. What you consider a flaw, I see as a feature. Having multi-pose figures might not "matter," except of course if you enjoy the modelling aspect (I do), and particularly if you hate painting the same figure more than once. So in your example, assuming 4 different variants for all 7 steps, you can potentially have 16384 different variants based on a single sprue! THAT in my mind is fantastic! And yes, it really, really bugs me when I have several figures that are the same (to the point I start considering modding them if the variability is too low).

Again, as a model builder, all the aspects you find fault with are trivial issues. Plastic will always have mold lines, no matter how well molded it is (I say this after having built hundreds of plastic kits over he decades, from the top manufacturers even), and I find the assembly phase relaxing and just as much part of the hobby as anything else.

I'll also say this, I'll take assembly of 4 to 5 times as many multipart plastic figures ANY DAY over pinning and assembling multipart metal figures. Any day!

Also, do address a few points:



1. Glue front torso to back


This prevents overly thick plastic pieces, and thus helps ensures there are no sink marks in the casting. This "increases" quality and quality control.



2. Glue complete torso to legs


See above. Also allows the fitting of different torsos to legs (a "feature" IMHO)



3. Glue arms to torso


Increases detail by making the arms actually appear 3d. I have a bunch of marines from the AoBR box. The molded on arms creates some compromises in detail because of mold limitations.



4. Glue bolter to arms


See above.



5. Glue shoulder pads to arms


Increases detail. See point for #3.



6. Glue head to torso


See point for #3. Plus I like to have my marines looking where their weapons are pointing.



7. Glue backpack to torso


See point #3. Also point #1

Damon.

spaint2k
20-01-2010, 03:00
Again, as a model builder, all the aspects you find fault with are trivial issues. Plastic will always have mold lines, no matter how well molded it is (I say this after having built hundreds of plastic kits over he decades, from the top manufacturers even), and I find the assembly phase relaxing and just as much part of the hobby as anything else.


I can only take exception to your point about mould lines. I will try and hunt down a pic I posted on Warseer of some marines I've got, but seriously, the mould lines I've seen on a LOT of GW stuff would be cause for rejection in any other industry. In many cases, they're not so much simple mould lines as cliffs caused by mould misalignment. Quite how that happens is completely baffling to me.

Steve

Hellebore
20-01-2010, 03:03
This prevents overly thick plastic pieces, and thus helps ensures there are no sink marks in the casting. This "increases" quality and quality control.


I thought this too until I realised that the Ork Boy torsos (and the new nob ones too for that matter) are MUCH larger than a marine torso and are still one piece.

Hellebore

spaint2k
20-01-2010, 03:08
I've found the pic I posted in here about my marines and their moulding quality. I must stress that I have had a number of kits whose components looked like this. Unfortunately, I had already clipped the pieces off the sprues by the time I realized. Had the kit been intact it would have been winging its way back to GW HQ with a letter and a request for replacement.

Crazy Harborc
20-01-2010, 03:49
I'm another wargamer for whom the actual wargame is the most important aspect of the hobby of wargaming. Assembling and painting the minies is something I "have" to do to prepare the minies for use.

For myself, having goodly numbers of decent looking minies (after painting) at a low as possible price, is the most important part of the deal.

GW's products are luxuary items, not neccessary for survival. For the minies I have and still do buy....GW costs more be it for one each, blisters and or boxes.

The Ginger Ninja
20-01-2010, 07:04
I'm another wargamer for whom the actual wargame is the most important aspect of the hobby of wargaming. Assembling and painting the minies is something I "have" to do to prepare the minies for use.

For myself, having goodly numbers of decent looking minies (after painting) at a low as possible price, is the most important part of the deal.

GW's products are luxuary items, not neccessary for survival. For the minies I have and still do buy....GW costs more be it for one each, blisters and or boxes.
Hear, Hear
@spaint2k, i winced at that picture, thats something you'd except from green toy soldiers made in china, not GW

Occulto
20-01-2010, 07:36
Those Thunderbolt Mountain miniatures may be stuck in pre-release hell, but take a look at his fantasy miniatures. You may not like the style, but the proportions are spot-on, the faces look like, well, faces not caricatures, and he sculpts the most realistic fabrics I've ever seen on a miniature.

...and there's bugger all variation. I counted 3 poses for the Elven archers and 4 poses for Goblin archers.

That's not a complaint about his work, more something that constantly frustrates me about a lot of alternate retailers to GW. They're good for skirmish games or individual figures, but incredibly poor at providing minis with enough variety to do entire armies.

neXus6
20-01-2010, 08:56
I've found the pic I posted in here about my marines and their moulding quality. I must stress that I have had a number of kits whose components looked like this. Unfortunately, I had already clipped the pieces off the sprues by the time I realized. Had the kit been intact it would have been winging its way back to GW HQ with a letter and a request for replacement.

The vast majority of marines I ever bought when I still had a marine army started off like that...took a long time to get them all looking nice and neat.

Back in those days I would never have even thought you could try to get a replacement because of mould lines, as opposed to a broken or missing part.

Much of GWs target market now are probably as naive as I was back then.

Hrafn
20-01-2010, 10:02
1. Glue front torso to back
2. Glue complete torso to legs
3. Glue arms to torso
4. Glue bolter to arms
5. Glue shoulder pads to arms
6. Glue head to torso
7. Glue backpack to torso

...if I can just get a "plug-and-play" Marine that only requires adding the bolter and backpack, something that gets you pretty much the exact same pose for a lot less effort. I'd rather have GW improve their mold lines and undercutting than on finding ways of making 5 different sets of arms that barely alter the angle of the boltgun.

Disagree very much.

Those steps are what consitutes interchangeability. The amount of seperate parts means that it is very easy to convert Marines, both with "official" GW upgrades (Chapter-specific sprues, commander sprues, command squad sprues) and with other bits. Furthermore, I find it untrue that you can only make a limited amount of poses with the bits. Perhaps we have differenty perceptions of what constitutes major assembly work, but I don't consider cutting and reglueing parts to be very demanding.

The interchangeability and flexibility is what I enjoy thoroughly with Marines. I miss that very much when I work on my Eldar as opposed to my Blood Drinkers. I don't give a damn about cleaning a few mold lines as opposed to reposing static single-pose sculpts...

IMHO, it is a mark of excellence that GW produces plastic minis this way. It is what seperates them from competitors. If they ever switched to make single pose static minis as you propose, I know I would shelf my Blood Drinkers for good.

spaint2k
20-01-2010, 10:06
IMHO, it is a mark of excellence that GW produces plastic minis this way. It is what seperates them from competitors. If they ever switched to make single pose static minis as you propose, I know I would shelf my Blood Drinkers for good.

On the other hand, I know of a company that used to make over 70 different static pose metal Goblins for their fantasy line. Metal, but with 70 poses you'd never need to cut them up anyway.
http://solegends.com/citcat912/c20176gobbocmd.htm

Hrafn
20-01-2010, 10:28
On the other hand, I know of a company that used to make over 70 different static pose metal Goblins for their fantasy line. Metal, but with 70 poses you'd never need to cut them up anyway.
http://solegends.com/citcat912/c20176gobbocmd.htm

Err...OK? :confused:

So you say that GW used to make Goblins with 70 different poses 10 years ago. Sorry, but what has that to do with the design of plastic Marine sprues today?

If I get your drift, you say that GW should make many different single pose Marines instead of multi-part plastic kits. I can't see how having 70 different single-pose Marine would help with interchangeability? Singlepose is still singlepose and hard to customize/individualize no matter how many of them there are.

Pokpoko
20-01-2010, 12:06
Hear, Hear
@spaint2k, i winced at that picture, thats something you'd except from green toy soldiers made in china, not GW
Actually, that was what I expected when I opened the box back when I bought GW. The number of kits with what I now know were mis-aligned moulds(back then I though they're supposed to be like that anyway) vastly out-numbered the "correct" ones. Sometimes I would get things like that in metal blisters too. Funnily enough, it was 40k that suffered from it, all my Lizardmen were very okay.
Anyway, as far as quality goes, GW is doing okay, but to say that they beat everyone out there is ovestatement of the year. That might have been the case, but nowadays with companies like corvus belli, Cypher studio(with both Anima and Helldorado they bought from Asmodee), or already mentioned Thunderbolt, not to mention companies that out-GW in their own style like Avatars of War, they lost this advantage. All of those produce models with much more filigree details, and more details period. Of course one might argue that the "thick" style of GW models is simply artistic choice, and it's true, but the point stands-GW's details are thick, sitck out from the surface, while the others manage to produce smaller, and just as clearly visible detailing. The only real advantage GW has is the economy of scale with their plastic kits, but Mantic and historical companies like Perry or Warlord is quickly catching up in this regard.

spaint2k
20-01-2010, 13:11
If I get your drift, you say that GW should make many different single pose Marines instead of multi-part plastic kits. I can't see how having 70 different single-pose Marine would help with interchangeability? Singlepose is still singlepose and hard to customize/individualize no matter how many of them there are.

What I mean is why would you need to individualize if you had 70 different marine models already made?

I have never seen your own work, so don't take this personally, but a lot of people never get past the cack-handed stage of conversion making and they might as well leave the models alone rather than perform what amounts to vandalism.

As for multipose - I can see both sides of this issue. Personally, I think that if GW's going to go to all the trouble of making my space marines so VERY VERY modular, they could at least give me some more ready-made arms. Three pairs of bolter-holding arms get old real fast.

And if the mould "lines" are as horrible as the ones I've posted above, building a space marine and individually cleaning each of his 10 malformed pieces also gets pretty irritating. Much less than cleaning up a clean, quality single-piece casting from Olleys Armies or Hasslefree.

Steve

Tonberry
20-01-2010, 13:59
I've found the pic I posted in here about my marines and their moulding quality. I must stress that I have had a number of kits whose components looked like this. Unfortunately, I had already clipped the pieces off the sprues by the time I realized. Had the kit been intact it would have been winging its way back to GW HQ with a letter and a request for replacement.


Your picture showcases the exact thing I was referring to in my earlier post. Very poor quality and takes a long time to clean up, and the two halves on either side of the mould line don't join up properly, and it cuts through the purity seals on the legs so they look stupid.

Definitely not happy with these, especially conscidering the cost.

Kroot Lord
20-01-2010, 14:18
I've found the pic I posted in here about my marines and their moulding quality. I must stress that I have had a number of kits whose components looked like this. Unfortunately, I had already clipped the pieces off the sprues by the time I realized. Had the kit been intact it would have been winging its way back to GW HQ with a letter and a request for replacement.

Posting naughty up-skirt pictures of Space Marines, are we?

Better report yourself to the Chaplain then!

Night Bearer
20-01-2010, 15:21
So in your example, assuming 4 different variants for all 7 steps, you can potentially have 16384 different variants based on a single sprue! THAT in my mind is fantastic!
It's meaningless variation.

Without converting, how many different ways does a Tactical Space Marine hold a gun (e.g. right/left handed, one/two handed, by the handle, by the strap, by the barrel, etc etc)?

Why bother with separate arms and bolters when the stock options are point barrel slightly up, point barrel slightly down, and point barrel vaguely level? Again, it's worthless variation, same with the heads - most SM helmets are the exact same design with minimal tube variations.


And yes, it really, really bugs me when I have several figures that are the same (to the point I start considering modding them if the variability is too low).
My point exactly. Building a multi-piece models takes the same time as the simple conversion you'd do anyways to make it "unique" - so why force others who just want to build and play to have to do that work as well?


Again, as a model builder, all the aspects you find fault with are trivial issues.
By the same token, all the aspects you prefer are trivial preferences. You're going to convert it anyways.


Plastic will always have mold lines, no matter how well molded it is (I say this after having built hundreds of plastic kits over he decades, from the top manufacturers even),
Disagree strongly. There are a lot of plastic kits out there that do not suffer the mold issues GW's kits do.


This prevents overly thick plastic pieces, and thus helps ensures there are no sink marks in the casting. This "increases" quality and quality control.
As has already been stated, GW makes thicker bits with no issues. There is absolutely no need for separate torso parts.


Also allows the fitting of different torsos to legs (a "feature" IMHO)
99.99% of all plastic Space Marines I have ever seen use the same three basic postures covered by GW's previous metal Marine models (standing straight, torso twisted slightly left, torso twisted slightly right).

Ditto with helmets, ditto with boltgun positioning. I don't mean to offend, but 99% of plaggy Marines don't do anything that a full set or range of single-piece metal (or one-piece metal with plastic arms and pads) couldn't do just as well.

Look, if GW produced Gundam-quality kits, I wouldn't mind multi-piece. Still unnecessary given these are mass rank and file models for a wargame, but they'd be fine.

However, GW does have serious issues with mold lines, undercutting, misalignment, and other casting-related issues that are multiplied dramatically when, instead of having to deal with one or three badly-cast pieces, you are left having to clean up 7-10 pieces just to prepare it for the actual assembly.


Increases detail by making the arms actually appear 3d. I have a bunch of marines from the AoBR box. The molded on arms creates some compromises in detail because of mold limitations.
Those are self-imposed limitations. GW could deal with the undercutting issue if they used the same mold technology for Marines that they did for the Baneblade.

Why GW thinks that technology is too expensive for the primary selling figures, but not for a specialized vehicle only usable in a specialized rule subset, is beyond me.

Lord of Worms
20-01-2010, 15:57
Why GW thinks that technology is too expensive for the primary selling figures, but not for a specialized vehicle only usable in a specialized rule subset, is beyond me.

Because they have salesmen try to convince the customers that even though they play Necrons, its a good idea to buy the baneblade.:wtf:

Lars Porsenna
20-01-2010, 17:06
It's meaningless variation.

Without converting, how many different ways does a Tactical Space Marine hold a gun (e.g. right/left handed, one/two handed, by the handle, by the strap, by the barrel, etc etc)?


This is a limitation in mold design, not a limitation in either plastics manufacture OR multipart assembly.




Why bother with separate arms and bolters when the stock options are point barrel slightly up, point barrel slightly down, and point barrel vaguely level? Again, it's worthless variation, same with the heads - most SM helmets are the exact same design with minimal tube variations.


See above.



My point exactly. Building a multi-piece models takes the same time as the simple conversion you'd do anyways to make it "unique" - so why force others who just want to build and play to have to do that work as well?


But you already have that option. Buy AoBR. You can buy individual sprues from vendors. Why force people that WANT multipart flexibility away from that?



By the same token, all the aspects you prefer are trivial preferences. You're going to convert it anyways.


Being of multipart construction means conversion is easier. Case in point: I run World Eaters, and wanted to add some bikes to my collection. The standard CSM bikers are not in any way WE specific. It was a simple matter then to replace the torso with one from the Chaos Berzerkers set, add a head, weapon arm, and shoulder pads to the biker kit. Now I have a fairly unique set of models, all different in some way, and specific to my force. Plus being both in plastic and multi-part format means it was dead easy to do too (about an evening's work for 3).



Disagree strongly. There are a lot of plastic kits out there that do not suffer the mold issues GW's kits do.


ALL plastic kits have mold lines. Period. There is no getting away from this (and I base this on experience, having built models from trumpeter, Tamiya, Dragon, Italeri, AFV Club...etc). Not all mold lines are as prominent as the example you posted, but then I think the SM legs should be in 2 parts anyway.



As has already been stated, GW makes thicker bits with no issues. There is absolutely no need for separate torso parts.


SMs came out in -- what? -- 1999? It's a very good possibility GW's molding skill has increased since then. But my point still stands as this is what is done in the industry with other kits.



99.99% of all plastic Space Marines I have ever seen use the same three basic postures covered by GW's previous metal Marine models (standing straight, torso twisted slightly left, torso twisted slightly right).

Ditto with helmets, ditto with boltgun positioning. I don't mean to offend, but 99% of plaggy Marines don't do anything that a full set or range of single-piece metal (or one-piece metal with plastic arms and pads) couldn't do just as well.


Again, this is a problem of the mold design than one of plastic manufacture.

Besides, if SMs were in metal, a squad would cost $70 instead of $35 (or whatever it is these days), be more difficult for conversions (the one I mentioned above would not be possible without a great deal of effort), and be more difficult for assembly (you'd have to pin and epoxy the arms to make a durable figure -- a great deal more trouble compared to plastic, mold lines or not).



Look, if GW produced Gundam-quality kits, I wouldn't mind multi-piece. Still unnecessary given these are mass rank and file models for a wargame, but they'd be fine.

However, GW does have serious issues with mold lines, undercutting, misalignment, and other casting-related issues that are multiplied dramatically when, instead of having to deal with one or three badly-cast pieces, you are left having to clean up 7-10 pieces just to prepare it for the actual assembly.


I just powered through 28 DE warriors the last two nights. There were no misaligned molds in my kit or any other casting issues.



Those are self-imposed limitations. GW could deal with the undercutting issue if they used the same mold technology for Marines that they did for the Baneblade.


The Baneblade is a much newer kit. Maybe the marines need to be recut (again, the last recut was barely worth the trouble, being the same masters just rearranged on the sprue).



Why GW thinks that technology is too expensive for the primary selling figures, but not for a specialized vehicle only usable in a specialized rule subset, is beyond me.

Maybe their sales figures say differently?

EDIT: I just remembered why the SM torsos are in 2 pieces: its because the head and leg joins are ball joints, and it would be impossible to mold the depressions on the torsos without the use of slide molds (and even then, a 4 directional slide mold for one piece torsos might be more trouble than they're worth, or too expensive).

Damon.

AndrewGPaul
21-01-2010, 11:24
Case and point: HE spearmen, the only thing stopping me from making a spear/seaguard heavy army. I would pay more for better product, in other words, no inch thick mould lines, block hands/heads, and way to many parts for low quality models. HE probly wont be getting re done for another few years (6 or so), so what's stopping them from following through with many armies 2nd waves?

It's "Case in point". :)

I use the old 4th edition single-pice High Elf spearmen, because IMO they're better sculpts than the fat freaks Gary Morley churned out. OK, there's only one pose, but these guys all march in military precision anyway.


...and there's bugger all variation. I counted 3 poses for the Elven archers and 4 poses for Goblin archers.

That's not a complaint about his work, more something that constantly frustrates me about a lot of alternate retailers to GW. They're good for skirmish games or individual figures, but incredibly poor at providing minis with enough variety to do entire armies.

Be fair; he's only one guy, and he's got to run his company, deal with the casting, and do the other stuff he does on commission. Not like he can sit down for a month and do nothing bu sculpt elves. :)

Wintermute
21-01-2010, 19:58
I've removed a number of posts which discuss GW's policy on pricing.

If you wish to discuss this subject, then do so here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=209297) and no where else on WarSeer.

If there are more posts in this thread which discuss pricing, I will carry out my threat to issue warnings to those who ignore my request.

Wintermute

BobtheInquisitor
21-01-2010, 20:58
I can only take exception to your point about mould lines. I will try and hunt down a pic I posted on Warseer of some marines I've got, but seriously, the mould lines I've seen on a LOT of GW stuff would be cause for rejection in any other industry. In many cases, they're not so much simple mould lines as cliffs caused by mould misalignment. Quite how that happens is completely baffling to me.

Steve

You should take them back if there is a serious mold misalignment like that. Most GW plastics have a small line that can be trimmed pretty quickly with the side of an X-acto knife, so if you have a box with terrible mold lines, just switch it for one with mild mold lines. It will keep your blood pressure down a lot more than fuming about mold "cliffs" years later on the internet.

And, no, not all GW kits from the same mold have the same mold line issues. If you bring your box back with a complaint, they will be able to find you a box with sprues in good condition.

Also, since I am a modeller who does not play tabletop at all, I find the idea of one-piece plastics horrifying. Every single model that I make is converted in some way. Without all the pieces and options, there would be no reason for me to buy any GW products. The idea that GW models would have better quality if they had fewer options is ridiculous: if all you want are those little green plastic soldiers, then why don't you just buy them and call them "counts as"? Heck, there are little 8-dollar snap-fit kits for every army, so there is no reason at all for you to buy the tactical squad box, unless you're just doing it to complain.

Occulto
22-01-2010, 00:08
Be fair; he's only one guy, and he's got to run his company, deal with the casting, and do the other stuff he does on commission. Not like he can sit down for a month and do nothing bu sculpt elves. :)

Like I said, it's not a complaint about his work - which I think is quite spectacular. For RPG or skirmish games, I'd happily buy some of those Elves.

My point is that his work is not as suitable for my needs as another retailer. For army building, I'd rather "lesser" quality sculpts with more variation.

I've seen plenty of retailers that produce spectacular models, but I don't buy them because they're one-offs (like Helldorado) or there's only a couple of variations.

There are some retailers like the guys who do Wargods (I forget their name) and Mantic who are more suitable for army building - but in my experience, they're the exception rather than the norm.

Pokpoko
22-01-2010, 01:35
but in my experience, they're the exception rather than the norm. Probably because there's no point in competing with GW in " company-level combat"(I refuse to call anything with ~100 models per side "massed" or "battle"), so they went for skirmish market, which seems to bloom at this point with innovative rules and great minis, as well as cheaper alternatives.

The Ginger Ninja
22-01-2010, 01:39
Also, since I am a modeller who does not play tabletop at all, I find the idea of one-piece plastics horrifying. Every single model that I make is converted in some way. Without all the pieces and options, there would be no reason for me to buy any GW products. The idea that GW models would have better quality if they had fewer options is ridiculous: if all you want are those little green plastic soldiers, then why don't you just buy them and call them "counts as"? Heck, there are little 8-dollar snap-fit kits for every army Chaos space marines, Eldar, Imperial Guard, Space marines, and tyranids, so there is no reason at all for you to buy the tactical squad box, unless you're just doing it to complain.

Fixed it for you
If GW sold necron 5 ma- sorry Robot squads, i would be jumping all over them

outbreak
22-01-2010, 04:36
in terms of mold lines i think every set has been misalligned and looked like the pics on the previous page! In terms of single pose models i am very happy with how the skaven clanrats are done. The models in my units don't all look identical and have different clothes/armour/designs on the single pose body. I do however think this is only a good idea for mass infantry core. Anything special or elite should be easily customisable.

spaint2k
22-01-2010, 04:56
You should take them back if there is a serious mold misalignment like that. Most GW plastics have a small line that can be trimmed pretty quickly with the side of an X-acto knife, so if you have a box with terrible mold lines, just switch it for one with mild mold lines. It will keep your blood pressure down a lot more than fuming about mold "cliffs" years later on the internet.

Like I said, I had already clipped the pieces from the sprues and threw them into bit trays. I must have several sets mixed together and no way of knowing how many were that bad (it seems like a lot).

Rest assured that EVERY purchase I make is now inspected and checked for this crap. GW is informed of each and every reject and I am always satisfied with the replacements.

Steve

BobtheInquisitor
23-01-2010, 20:50
Fixed it for you
If GW sold necron 5 ma- sorry Robot squads, i would be jumping all over them

I'm sorry. Much like GW, I forgot that Necrons and Dark Eldar exist.


And nobody cares about the Tau.

vladsimpaler
25-01-2010, 04:10
...and there's bugger all variation. I counted 3 poses for the Elven archers and 4 poses for Goblin archers.

That's not a complaint about his work, more something that constantly frustrates me about a lot of alternate retailers to GW. They're good for skirmish games or individual figures, but incredibly poor at providing minis with enough variety to do entire armies.

Yes, because there is so much variation from a Cadian Shock Trooper box or a Tactical Marine box.

They all end up looking the same or very close to it.

Occulto
25-01-2010, 07:12
Yes, because there is so much variation from a Cadian Shock Trooper box or a Tactical Marine box.

They all end up looking the same or very close to it.

Really?

If you can't get more variation out of a box of these multipart models, than three or four distinct static sculpts, then you're really not putting much effort into your model building.

I know GW negativity is all the rage, and any concession that they've done anything good is tantamount to heresy. But when I hear someone say that a handful of static models provide just as much variation as a multipart kit (with the ability to swap between multiple kits as GW's are designed to do) - I hear someone really grasping at straws to make a point.

Is it such a bad thing to concede: "while the sculpting proportions and production quality of GW's kits might be inferior to <insert small online retailer>, that doesn't mean <insert small online retailer> are a better choice when it comes time to build an army."

Trying to use figures intended for a skirmish game to create a full sized army of 50+ models, is trying to bash the proverbial square peg into the round hole.

EmperorNorton
25-01-2010, 11:59
If you can't get more variation out of a box of these multipart models, than three or four distinct static sculpts, then you're really not putting much effort into your model building.

Thing is, you shouldn't have to put much effort into it.
If I wanted to put much effort into it, I could individualize static sculpts and wouldn't need multipart models.
With the small amount of effort I am willing to put in, the multipart models really don't offer that much variety.
Considering I have a whole cabinet full of bitz I'm likely never to find a use for, I'd prefer if all those options were truly optional, i.e. I'd have the option not to pay for what I don't use.

vladsimpaler
26-01-2010, 01:24
Really?

If you can't get more variation out of a box of these multipart models, than three or four distinct static sculpts, then you're really not putting much effort into your model building.

I know GW negativity is all the rage, and any concession that they've done anything good is tantamount to heresy. But when I hear someone say that a handful of static models provide just as much variation as a multipart kit (with the ability to swap between multiple kits as GW's are designed to do) - I hear someone really grasping at straws to make a point.

Is it such a bad thing to concede: "while the sculpting proportions and production quality of GW's kits might be inferior to <insert small online retailer>, that doesn't mean <insert small online retailer> are a better choice when it comes time to build an army."

Trying to use figures intended for a skirmish game to create a full sized army of 50+ models, is trying to bash the proverbial square peg into the round hole.

I'm not being anti-GW. But let's get real here, there isn't that much variation in the Cadian shock trooper set of 10 guys. There are 5 different leg styles (that all look about the same), and all of the faces look about the same. And all of the arms.

Keep in mind that there are normally more than 3 or 4 sculpts released for a skirmish army. And there is always green/brown stuff. :angel:

snurl
26-01-2010, 06:58
Mysteriously, all of the metal minotaurs have recently vanished from the shelves at my local indie. (I know, because I went there to get them myself, and they were gone already) They were there 2 weeks ago. Hmmmmm.....

Crazy Harborc
26-01-2010, 20:34
In the past, our local indies (AND the GW store when we had one) once in a blue moon, got a heads up from GW to send back all of whatever GW wanted to stop carrying (for credit on what was returned of course).

Some of the GW suits must have decided GW will make more money and sell more replacement minies if the older versions disappear from stores weeks or months before the new stuff is released.

Occulto
27-01-2010, 11:08
I'm not being anti-GW. But let's get real here, there isn't that much variation in the Cadian shock trooper set of 10 guys. There are 5 different leg styles (that all look about the same), and all of the faces look about the same. And all of the arms.

I've got a bunch of Cadians on my shelf here, and although, no, they're not radically different, it's still a damn sight better than the Tallarns I used to have.

And that's before getting into things like head swaps from other GW kits or using other company's components - like those Pig Iron heads. Give me the choice of a ball socket to glue something into or a date with a dremel and 100 heads to file down before I attach the new ones? I know which gives me the easier way to personalise my models.


Keep in mind that there are normally more than 3 or 4 sculpts released for a skirmish army.

I'd be genuinely curious to see some examples, because (as I said before) almost every time someone points to an alternate retailer and says: "see how good they are", I see a handful of sculpts at best.

Or if I do see something that works as a unit, it's got a style very different to anything else I find.

I love the screwed up imagination that produces minis like Dark Age (http://www.dark-age.com/main.php) and I've got a couple of figures of theirs that are beautiful quality (and make tasty Daemon heralds), but there's no way you could make a decent sized army out of their stuff. Fantastic character models, but sorely lacking when it comes time for the rank 'n' file stuff. Ditto Helldorado, Alkemy, Infinity, Anima Tactics and so on.

I'm not denying that there are good companies out there - but it takes a lot of work to make the army you want, from a bunch of figures that maintain consistency that looks less regimented than an army made from Heroquest minis.

You mix the archers from the afore mentioned site, with some Mantic and GW Elves and it looks more like a multi-xenos scene from a Star Wars prequel than a coherent Elf army.


And there is always green/brown stuff. :angel:

The occasional gap filler or patch fur is the limit of my modelling ability. :angel:

spaint2k
27-01-2010, 14:36
I'd be genuinely curious to see some examples, because (as I said before) almost every time someone points to an alternate retailer and says: "see how good they are", I see a handful of sculpts at best.

Or if I do see something that works as a unit, it's got a style very different to anything else I find.


The caveat you've included makes it hard to "win" here, but Olley's Armies (http://hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/) sells enough different Space Dwarfs (Scrunts) to allow you to field a varied and interesting army with heavy weapons, light and heavily armoured infantry, vehicles and no duplicates. There must be over a hundred of them. You could even use his mutant scrunts as psykers if you were doing an IG army.

Hasslefree (http://hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/) Grymn. I'm not that familiar with the range but there seems to be an awful lot of them.

Copplestone Castings (http://www.copplestonecastings.co.uk/) has a lot of Sci-Fi skirmish figures that go well together.

There must be more I can't think of off the top of my head.

I dunno, Occulto, I had the feeling you were well-up on your independent manufacturers.

Also, for what it's worth in terms of the thread topic, the QUALITY of the first two manufacturers I've listed is streets ahead of GW in terms of mould lines. Prices are good too.

Lars Porsenna
27-01-2010, 15:34
And that's before getting into things like head swaps from other GW kits or using other company's components - like those Pig Iron heads. Give me the choice of a ball socket to glue something into or a date with a dremel and 100 heads to file down before I attach the new ones? I know which gives me the easier way to personalise my models.

Even then, if the plastic head is a fixed one (such as on the Eldar jetbikes), being in plastic makes it infinitely more easy to modify than the metal Shrieker jetbike torso. I replaced the heads on all my jetbikers with the more "modern" Eldar head. It was a simple matter to clip off the old style heads, a little knife work and filing to clean up the stub, and then drill a depression to socket in the new head. On metal this would have been quite a bit of work. On plastic though it was an evening's work with a few jetbikers...

Damon.

UberBeast
27-01-2010, 16:37
It's hard to make comparison of quality of figures without referencing the huge disperity between their pricing, but since it's already fairly evident which companies charge more for their figures and which charge less I'll simply stick to the figures.

http://www.sale-warhammer.com/images/Bretonnian%20Men-at-arms.jpg

http://www.warlordgames.co.uk/?p=3728

GW figures have a cartoony feel to them, but still look decent. The Perry's are know for realism and attention to historical detail.

Coasty
27-01-2010, 16:54
Is it such a bad thing to concede: "while the sculpting proportions and production quality of GW's kits might be inferior to <insert small online retailer>, that doesn't mean <insert small online retailer> are a better choice when it comes time to build an army."

I've not seen many small online retailers whose models are better than GW's. Most wargaming companies seem to think that good figures should resemble the horrible, lumpen, misproportioned metal figures of years gone by, even though there's no need for it. Even the most hideously malformed Cadian is better than some of the things I've seen from small firms.

spaint2k
27-01-2010, 16:57
I've not seen many small online retailers whose models are better than GW's. Most wargaming companies seem to think that good figures should resemble the horrible, lumpen, misproportioned metal figures of years gone by, even though there's no need for it. Even the most hideously malformed Cadian is better than some of the things I've seen from small firms.

While I have seen the kind of figures you're talking about, I have to ask: did you look at *any* of the links I posted?

Coasty
27-01-2010, 17:09
Those metal-and-resin guys? Two materials I won't go anywhere near, I'm afraid. I like modelling, I like chopping things up. Plastic is good for that; resin and metal are pains in the ****.

spaint2k
27-01-2010, 17:18
They're metal, and part of the point of the preceding discussion was that with enough of a variety of models, you don't NEED to chop the damn things up.

duffybear1988
27-01-2010, 18:30
just nabbed a cheap metal venerable dreadnought and it is aweful to build, gaps everywhere and misalligned parts. Its going to need a lot of work to make it right.

Crazy Harborc
27-01-2010, 19:29
Bad minies in metal have been and likely (as long as metal ones are made) be a problem. Even "top of the line" GW minies have many "issues".

Plastic minies also have problems, mis-mades, missing whatevers, due to old molds etc. THAT said, for me and my mates, plastic minies, 28mm ones, are easier to convert, repair and or just plain assemble.

Occulto
27-01-2010, 23:18
The caveat you've included makes it hard to "win" here,

That "caveat" is the reason why a manufacturer like GW gets my cash over the vast majority of independent manufacturers. If I were into Warmachine then Privateer Press would get my money for the same reasons.


but Olley's Armies (http://hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/) sells enough different Space Dwarfs (Scrunts) to allow you to field a varied and interesting army with heavy weapons, light and heavily armoured infantry, vehicles and no duplicates. There must be over a hundred of them. You could even use his mutant scrunts as psykers if you were doing an IG army.

Hasslefree (http://hasslefreeminiatures.co.uk/) Grymn. I'm not that familiar with the range but there seems to be an awful lot of them.

You don't seem to be familiar with them at all. Grymn are Space Dwarfs.

And yes, while there's a lot of Dwarfs, we click on Elves and there's a grand total of 7 figures. We click on Sci-Fi humans and get one. :wtf: Orcs & Goblins are promising with one spearman multi-part pack, but only have one archer for both Orcs and Goblins.


Copplestone Castings (http://www.copplestonecastings.co.uk/) has a lot of Sci-Fi skirmish figures that go well together.

There must be more I can't think of off the top of my head.

Again, I see some soviet figures that would be good for an Imperial Guard army, except that there are a grand total of 5 infantry guys and I'd probably have to sculpt my own heavy weapons.


I dunno, Occulto, I had the feeling you were well-up on your independent manufacturers.

Oh I am. You seem to be assuming that because I didn't mention these guys by name that I was unaware of them.

All you did was present some manufacturers that just back up my original point. They're both companies that provide miniatures which work very well for skirmish low-model count games, but scale incredibly poorly into armies.

I asked to see examples of companies that produce minis for armies, not a D&D or Call of Cthulhu session.


Also, for what it's worth in terms of the thread topic, the QUALITY of the first two manufacturers I've listed is streets ahead of GW in terms of mould lines. Prices are good too.

You're like a salesman who's adamant I should buy a convertible when I've walked into the showroom looking for a van. Sure the MPG might be better on the convertible, it might be cheaper and yes it might look sexier.

But if I'm there to buy a vehicle for the purposes of moving furniture, then showing me convertible after convertible and saying: "this one's got a really big trunk" or "I guess you could strap a table to the top of it," still isn't going to fulfill my requirements - is it?

Pokpoko
28-01-2010, 01:18
For armies, chech Critical Mass, Ground Zero Games, Khurasan Miniatures has nice growing range...All of them in the only acceptable format for "army" games, 15mm:angel: Well, 6mm is acceptable too, but less visually pleasing:D

spaint2k
28-01-2010, 02:32
You don't seem to be familiar with them at all. Grymn are Space Dwarfs.


Um, I never said they weren't. I just don't know how many there are.



Again, I see some soviet figures that would be good for an Imperial Guard army, except that there are a grand total of 5 infantry guys and I'd probably have to sculpt my own heavy weapons.


I guess it's a matter of taste but I saw a lot more military infantry than that here:
http://www.copplestonecastings.co.uk/range.php?range=FW

Admittedly, there's only one mortar so heavy weapons would be a problem but I do think the variation is interesting; I see veterans, Storm Troopers and regulars from different locales (like the older metal boxes of IG models). Since they're sculpted by the same guy they have a look that binds them together.



All you did was present some manufacturers that just back up my original point. They're both companies that provide miniatures which work very well for skirmish low-model count games, but scale incredibly poorly into armies.

I asked to see examples of companies that produce minis for armies, not a D&D or Call of Cthulhu session.


In fairness, I thought you were asking for examples of companies that produce "more than a handful" [for skirmish games, as per the comment you were quoting].

All three examples I cited are large ranges.

Bob Olley's got over a hundred Scrunts in that range, Hasslefree's Grymn number more than 50, Copplestone's military models number close to 100.



You're like a salesman who's adamant I should buy a convertible when I've walked into the showroom looking for a van. Sure the MPG might be better on the convertible, it might be cheaper and yes it might look sexier.

But if I'm there to buy a vehicle for the purposes of moving furniture, then showing me convertible after convertible and saying: "this one's got a really big trunk" or "I guess you could strap a table to the top of it," still isn't going to fulfill my requirements - is it?

FWIW, I'm not trying to sell you anything. I merely pointed out the existence of other products. You were actually saying "No-one but GW sells moving trucks" and I said "Hasslefree and Olleys Armies sell trucks of comparable size". I just didn't know that you wouldn't like the colors they sell (Space Dwarf, beardless Space Dwarf).

And those Dark Age minis look great. Thanks for posting that link :)

Cheers,
Steve

AndrewGPaul
28-01-2010, 09:27
Again, I see some soviet figures that would be good for an Imperial Guard army, except that there are a grand total of 5 infantry guys and I'd probably have to sculpt my own heavy weapons.
Not hugely bothered in debating the general point, but on the subject of Copplestone's models,
FW11 Female Troopers,
FW13 Jungle Troopers,
FW22 Jungle Trooper Characters
FW28 Assault Trooper Mortar Team
FW34 Troopers in Berets
FW35 Trooper Officers
FW7 Mercenaries
FW8 Assault Troopers
FW9 Assault Trooper Characters

48 models, all in the same style (IMO, at least there's some variation - the mercenaries are a little scruffy, for instance). Among them are 29 riflemen (some of which could be sergeants), a mortar team, a missile launcher, 2 snipers, 7 light machine gunners and a few others with pistols and shotguns and things.

Among the Neo-Socvs, there's 2 packs of troopers, a pack of specialists and a pack of officers. That's 9 SMGs, 2 LMGs, 2 missile launchers, 2 snipers, 3 officers and a standard bearer.

YMMV of course, but there's enough there to do an army, for me. Mind you, there's people who'll do huge 28mm armies for Napoleonic warfare with one pose per troop type!

Osbad
28-01-2010, 10:48
Tons of Sci-fi models in 25mm scale here:

http://www.gtns.co.uk/store1/commerce.cgi?page=sg-fp.html&cart_id=4596181.6826

Abosulutely tons. All at around 1 each for metals.

There's plenty of variety about, you just have to get off your **** and look rather than sitting in the nest like a baby bird expecting to be spoon fed by your momma puking in your beak...

Griefbringer
28-01-2010, 11:21
Not hugely bothered in debating the general point, but on the subject of Copplestone's models,
FW11 Female Troopers,
FW13 Jungle Troopers,
FW22 Jungle Trooper Characters
FW28 Assault Trooper Mortar Team
FW34 Troopers in Berets
FW35 Trooper Officers
FW7 Mercenaries
FW8 Assault Troopers
FW9 Assault Trooper Characters

48 models, all in the same style

Ummm, shouldn't that be 43 models actually (3 in mortar pack, 5 in each of the others), or did you forget to list some pack?

Mind me, if you want more variety then eM4 also stocks the original Copplestone Grenadier Future Warriors range, which should be pretty much totally compatible:

http://www.em4miniatures.com/acatalog/TROOPERS.html

AndrewGPaul
28-01-2010, 13:01
Ooops, 43, yes.

AndrewGPaul
28-01-2010, 13:02
Tons of Sci-fi models in 25mm scale here:

http://www.gtns.co.uk/store1/commerce.cgi?page=sg-fp.html&cart_id=4596181.6826

Abosulutely tons. All at around 1 each for metals.

There's plenty of variety about, you just have to get off your **** and look rather than sitting in the nest like a baby bird expecting to be spoon fed by your momma puking in your beak...

Depends what you want them for. As alternate Imperial Guard for use against GW minis, none of those GZG minis are any use, because the scale is wrong.

Bloodknight
28-01-2010, 13:19
Even if they'd fit...I wonder why one would pay 1 pound per mini for absolutely awful stuff like that. Seriously, they look like they'd push them through a time machine in 1980 to sell them now...

Pokpoko
28-01-2010, 14:21
Well, they are very old. And frankly, like most stuff on GZG shop they're there just because, I'm pretty sure the company focuses on 15mm and spaceships exclusively nowaday.

Night Bearer
28-01-2010, 14:37
In the past, our local indies (AND the GW store when we had one) once in a blue moon, got a heads up from GW to send back all of whatever GW wanted to stop carrying (for credit on what was returned of course).

Some of the GW suits must have decided GW will make more money and sell more replacement minies if the older versions disappear from stores weeks or months before the new stuff is released.
GW no longer buys back their product, even the armybooks/codecii.

My #1 issue with the "quality" of GW's plastics is that they simply require more prep time than I'm willing to deal with. I have neither the time nor inclination to convert every single model in my army (characters yes, rank and file no), and I've yet to see a GW infantry kit where the eleventy-billion alleged pose combinations don't look exactly alike as is.

As such, there's a lot of wasted time building models I'd rather spend painting or gaming. Fex, a "one-piece" SM/CSM with one-piece torso/legs/arms, and you only add the bolter, shoulder pads, and helmet, would be stellar. I'd rather have an army like the Space Hulk termies or the Skaven clanrats - lots of unique few-piece models - than having to deal with what is simply unnecessary assembly for what I want out of an army.

As a result, Warmachine represents a better value to me, because its assembly phase doesn't detract or interfere with my preferences to be painting or playing. Metals are extremely easy for me to clean and prep (including pinning), whereas scraping mold line after mold line with (GW's) plastics just kills my interest in starting an army.

Again, issues like this are always subjective, but I do think there's some legitimacy, from a pure business point of view, to cater to the minimalist customers and provide optional options for those wishing to mod every single model, rather than forcing everyone to assemble models when at least a sizable minority (if not a majority) would be happy with something closer to the Black Reach / Space Hulk models.

Or, actually design variant poses that make it worth while to assemble each model out of 6-8 parts without having to do the conversion work you'd be doing anyways. Again, it just seems wasteful to me to put gamers through all that trouble when the results are not really all that significantly different than the old days of metal one-piece models or metal models with separate arms.

Again, YMMV.

AndrewGPaul
28-01-2010, 15:31
Even if they'd fit...I wonder why one would pay 1 pound per mini for absolutely awful stuff like that. Seriously, they look like they'd push them through a time machine in 1980 to sell them now...


Well, they are very old. And frankly, like most stuff on GZG shop they're there just because, I'm pretty sure the company focuses on 15mm and spaceships exclusively nowaday.

The NA Marines look pretty good for 25mm, IMO. Also, the design idea is different; they're not hugely burdened with skulls, spikes, scrolls, seals, more skulls, ... like a lot of GW's minis. For example, I can't stand the Vostryoans, they're far too cluttered, and there's plenty of people who agree. Those GAG models are nicely sculpted, reasonably well-proportioned and have pretty simple lines.

Osbad
28-01-2010, 16:31
Even if they'd fit...I wonder why one would pay 1 pound per mini for absolutely awful stuff like that. Seriously, they look like they'd push them through a time machine in 1980 to sell them now...

Of course GW models are all beautiful and an absolute bargain...*cough* 15 quid for a Poombahgor *cough*, and their Imperial Guard are well-proportioned, thoroughly modern models that aren't stuck in a 1980's timewarp, no not at all *cough* Catachans *cough*

Horses for courses. I picked the first mass-produced sci-fi modeller I could think of off the top of my head.

If you were a little less lazy and a little more interested in actually finding an answer to your comment instead of trying to pimp GW's crap you can actually do a search in this very forum and find 2 or so threads from not that long ago giving fully comprehensive suggestions of alternative non-GW models for both Sci-fi and Fantasy. Of course if you slap your hands over your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears you won't risk actually finding anything and you will continue to be happy in the La La Land that is the belief taht GW is always and forever will be the greatest and the best... the choice is yours!

Odin
28-01-2010, 16:38
Agreed, I can't fault GW on their current plastic model production.
The majority are very detailed and top quality, with increasing variety in bits included- and importantly consistent.

The Empire state troops are very poor quality, but generally the plastics are exceptional.

Bloodknight
28-01-2010, 20:20
Also, the design idea is different; they're not hugely burdened with skulls, spikes, scrolls, seals, more skulls, ... like a lot of GW's minis.

Right. I actually enjoyed GW's metal Space Marines to the current ones because they're cleaner sculpts. Those GZG models are still awful, though, with their spindly bodies and giant heads. On GW models, at least everything is oversized ;)

@Osbad: the insult aside, I did look at quite a few alternative modelling companies, and I still think that most of them are crap. The only Sci-Fi-models that I would accept really qualitywise are those for Infinity, but I hate their style...

Pokpoko
28-01-2010, 20:50
and I still think that most of them are crap. A lot are, because a lot of gaming companies are one-man garage enterprises done on the side. But honestly, if you're going to tell me those models in attachment are bad, I'll be very suprised. But then again, I strongly dislike GW's static, stocky style so...

Bloodknight
28-01-2010, 21:01
Yeah, I confused Anima Tactics and Infinity (technically good models, but too mangaesque for my liking). Edited above.

The Ginger Ninja
28-01-2010, 22:07
@Night Bearer: Have you seen the little 3-5 man kits GW sell? They require next to no assembly

Occulto
28-01-2010, 22:44
Um, I never said they weren't. I just don't know how many there are.

Don't mind me, my cat woke me up at 5:30 in the morning bleating for food and that left me a little grouchy. :p


FWIW, I'm not trying to sell you anything. I merely pointed out the existence of other products. You were actually saying "No-one but GW sells moving trucks" and I said "Hasslefree and Olleys Armies sell trucks of comparable size". I just didn't know that you wouldn't like the colors they sell (Space Dwarf, beardless Space Dwarf).

I guess my issue is that stuff like that really seems to be the exception rather than the rule if I'm looking to build an army.

I'm not surprised that there are more IG alternatives out there, considering you could use green army men to make an army. :D

I started seriously looking at trying to find alternate 28mm fantasy figures after hearing the usual refrain of: "well you don't have to use GW... there are cheaper and better alternatives out there." After looking at the number of ranges available for 6mm, I thought - well 28mm is more popular so surely that'll be even easier.

Needless to say, I was genuinely surprised at how few competitors exist that could fill the gap when it comes to building more than a skirmish force. Especially considering that high fantasy isn't exactly a niche genre.

It feels like an exercise trying to find the proverbial needle in a haystack.


And those Dark Age minis look great. Thanks for posting that link :)

Cheers,
Steve

They're one of my favorite lines out there.

AndrewGPaul
28-01-2010, 23:56
The difference is, I think, the number of sculptors. GZG is one bloke in his shed, as is Hasslefree, Heresy, Black Scorpion, Thunderbolt Mountain, ... In addition, Jes Goodwin and co aren't having to answer the phones, cast the models, run down to the post office with packages, buy metal, etc, etc. The closest competitors to GW, I think, are Reaper and Iron Wind Metals (at least in terms of numbers of items available; Reaper have gone for hundreds of RPG figures rather than 50 poses of 10 different troop types).

Occulto
29-01-2010, 00:19
The difference is, I think, the number of sculptors. GZG is one bloke in his shed, as is Hasslefree, Heresy, Black Scorpion, Thunderbolt Mountain, ... In addition, Jes Goodwin and co aren't having to answer the phones, cast the models, run down to the post office with packages, buy metal, etc, etc. The closest competitors to GW, I think, are Reaper and Iron Wind Metals (at least in terms of numbers of items available; Reaper have gone for hundreds of RPG figures rather than 50 poses of 10 different troop types).

Oh I know.

But if the store down the road from me doesn't have what I want, then they're not going to get my dollars - whether they're the local outlet with the full backing of a multi-national company or a single man operation.

It's for that reason that I've picked up some Dark Age models as WHFB Daemon Heralds. GW simply don't offer a good enough range in this regard.

Small scale manufacturers complement the big players like GW or PP - but they've got a long way to go before they can be accurately described as replacements.

Lars Porsenna
29-01-2010, 00:59
I think the INfinity figures are excellent (some of the best in the industry IMHO), but completely unsuitable for 40K. AND more expensive than GW figures! Each to their own...

Damon.

Pokpoko
29-01-2010, 01:34
AND more expensive than GW figures!
Damon.
Not really true. I can only use prices from Warstore as its the only US Infinity stockist I'm aware of, but all single Infinity models cost 11.25 MSRP(and under 9$ in warstore), while almost all GW single metals cost around 13$ on their own website.

but they've got a long way to go before they can be accurately described as replacements.
But they do replace GW completely...in their own chosen areas of intrest. Betting your entire business plan on being "stand-in" for another company's products, and investing heavily for that purpose(as you said, you want more than 5 poses, and a choice of units at that) seems very,very risky. Especially since there's noticeable shift to smaller scales for battle games, leaving 28mm for skirmish and similiar level games. but this should go into that other topic, about "noticeable shift", I reckon.

Crazy Harborc
29-01-2010, 01:49
That going to smaller scales must be in 40K, Scifi versions of wargaming. OR metal historical minies. There is a growing number of companies coming out with 28mm scale plastic minies.

Fortunately my regular, longtime opponents and I have agreed we do not want to go to a smaller scale. At least for any periods we game in now. We all have extensive collections of historical minies....growing numbers of plastic ones these days.;) For WWII we have large collections of 15mm scale models, minies and accessories. Most are NOT FoW minies/models.

Lars Porsenna
29-01-2010, 02:00
Not really true. I can only use prices from Warstore as its the only US Infinity stockist I'm aware of, but all single Infinity models cost 11.25 MSRP(and under 9$ in warstore), while almost all GW single metals cost around 13$ on their own website.


And yet a box of Swordmasters of Hoeth FREX (because I jsut got done filling out a unit) costs $24.75 for 5 (or $4.95 each). To make it a bit more comparative, a box of Sisters of Battle is $41.25 for 10 (or $4.13 each!). SO yes, individually the Infinity models are cheaper, but not cheaper than GW when bought in volume.

Besides, how many special characters are you going to buy anyway? My World Eaters army has Kharn, and that's it (all the rest are standard figures...it also happens to be 100% plastic save for Kharn and 2 squad leaders).

Damon.

Pokpoko
29-01-2010, 02:08
SO yes, individually the Infinity models are cheaper, but not cheaper than GW when bought in volume.


Well,thanks god you don't use models in volume for the game,no?



Besides, how many special characters are you going to buy anyway? Not many, but i was comparing like to like in pricing,otherwise it makes no sense(yes, metal,high quality models for skirmish game will be more expensive in bulk than cent-a-model plastics from GW, nobody's going to deny that...but that's why nobody's going to buy them in bulk in the first place). If I'd want bulk, I'd go for 120 models for 45$, and that's expensive because it's "brand" FOW box not OG or similiar. They're 15mm, but if we're comparing bulk prices only:angel:

Lars Porsenna
29-01-2010, 02:12
Well,thanks god you don't use models in volume for the game,no?


That's the advantage, but then I like LARGE games with lots of minis...



If I'd want bulk, I'd go for 120 models for 45$, and that's expensive because it's "brand" FOW box not OG or similiar. They're 15mm, but if we're comparing bulk prices only:angel:

Well, I think OG's WWII infantry figures are much, much better than FoW collection of Odo-esque garden gnomes...

Damon.

Pokpoko
29-01-2010, 02:18
They're tiny, they're 3D wound markers anyway, so I could hardly care in this case(which also nicely demonstrates why I don't like massed combat games in most cases-there's no sense of personality, or heroics, or anything, they're just wound markers to be taken off the board).

Redman120185
29-01-2010, 07:01
You get what you pay for, and in my opinion GW is worth the money

nanite
29-01-2010, 09:10
A couple gripes: 1) it wasn't to long ago that some of the GW range was a pretty good value. Now it's average to high price all across.

2) I've had some bad plastics lately. Warped sprues on my Land Speeder Storm, and a Space Marine Box that was really softly molded. It dimishies the quality proposition a little when boxes start to be hit-and-miss. The metals, however, are almost always nicely cast. Not world beating, but no complaints.

And an aside: I hate how infinity minis so often have mold lines right across those perfectly sculpted faces! I keep painting in scars for where I've mucked up the mold-line removal.

Oh and 'hi' Damon.

Vermin-thing
29-01-2010, 09:38
Best value set in the entire ranger is the OK battalion.

Lars Porsenna
29-01-2010, 17:35
Oh and 'hi' Damon.

Who let this guy in here???

Damon :D