PDA

View Full Version : Why the fascination with old mini's?



SallieKiller
20-03-2006, 21:03
Why is it that a lot of gamers want to use old mini's that are not made anymore and dont have any stats for the new system? So they take a mini they may have liked and try to fit it to something close to what it was. It no longer exisists in the game play so why use it? I see this floating about in forums all the time, but I just dont understand. I mean if it was a good model and still had stats in the new system of play, say a space marine, then yay I could see it being used. But why try to resurrect something from the dead?

Reabe
20-03-2006, 21:21
Because those models are better/cooler/from a time when GW gave a damn about Veterans?

They have the model. It could be represented by similar rules to the old model's rules. I don't see why they should pay the prices to get the proper miniature.

I mean, I would love to use a unit of the old Red Redemption miniatures to represent Norse Marauders in my Dogs of War army.

Ivan Stupidor
20-03-2006, 21:29
Old minis just tend to, in my eyes, have greater character to them than most new ones. They click with me in a way a lot of the new ones don't.

There is, of course, also the fact that you've already got this OOP whatever, and damned if you're going to buy a replacement just because GW stopped making rules for them, especially if, with a bit of lateral thinking, they can easily count as something else.

SallieKiller
20-03-2006, 21:45
ok, some of the older mini's look good, but a lot of them dont. Like I still laugh when I see the old space marine chaplains, I call them monkey chaplains. They do look like a cross between a monkey and an ork.

So its coming down to an issue of not having to pay for the "proper" mini then? even if it means using a mini which essentially doesnt exist, in game, anymore?
I mean, I would personally hate it if before a game someone went "well this represents this" for his whole army. That would bug the crap out of me.

Wolf Scout Ewan
20-03-2006, 21:45
Ummmm... its the same thing as people collecting antiques... they might be quite gruesome and poor quality but they are a part of history.

Ziljin
20-03-2006, 21:46
Well, some of them are very cool looking, and to some its valuable to have old stuff.

My cousin has an old emperor's champion mini. He said they gave it to everyone during a games day or something. He never painted it oddly enough. He threw out his paints and his DA army is collecting dust. But he still has that mini. At first, I thought it looked cool, but I like the new ermperor's champion model better now. The old one looks rather huge and fat.

Sleazy
20-03-2006, 21:46
Why is it that a lot of gamers want to use old mini's that are not made anymore and dont have any stats for the new system? So they take a mini they may have liked and try to fit it to something close to what it was. It no longer exisists in the game play so why use it? I see this floating about in forums all the time, but I just dont understand. I mean if it was a good model and still had stats in the new system of play, say a space marine, then yay I could see it being used. But why try to resurrect something from the dead?


worst argument ever.

I'm sorry dude but if I like a mini then I'm gonna want to use it. Why should I let someone else say how I play my games?

For example my WFB Chaos army often picks up interest and praise because of the diversity of models in there (something that really works in a "Chaos" army).
Some of these are old OOP models, some are from other miniature companys and some are extensive conversions. The majority of troops are admittedly current GW plastics but, for example I love the idea of centaurs but dont like the Centigor models thus I have a unit made up of old Chaos Centaurs, Maruader centaurs, Rackham Centaurs and a Heresy Centuar.... and it looks amazing!

Who are you to say "dont use OOP minis"?, either a GW stooge or someone who hasnt been around long enough to have any love for miniatures that dont fall into current dogma?.

(phew my first ever Warseer rant!)

Zzarchov
20-03-2006, 22:00
Some Mini's I just love more than anything currently out.

The Old WHFB Flagaellants, The Griffon, Old Plastic Genestealers, Uriah Jacobus..

So I use them, hell, I made a genestealer cult army just to use them all in one army.

wilsonian
20-03-2006, 22:18
I love old mins. infact i like the older rouge trader style of the SM missile launcher than the current "baazooka" look.

Also i have Sgt Centurius that was the 100th store special model - still in his blister collecting dust and value on my shelf. i did buy two but the other one is sitting in my shed in a pot of brake fuild!

I also liked the older Orks. i think GW ruined the 2nd buy bringing in the single pose models. then a few years after that they bring in "all new multi pose" which thinking about it they kinda already had (ok slight different models but you get the idea).

I even saw a squad of old "womble" looking marines on ebay undercoated only for £18! and it went at that price too!

People like the older models as it brings back memories. For me it's the old terminators. i loved space crusader and space hulk :D

Trench_Raider
20-03-2006, 22:41
I'm going to try my best not to savagely flame the original poster to the point he cries and runs home. I think he deserves that. But I will refrain from doing so, just to keep the peace.

Son, (as I strongly suspect you are a very young person) you rather remind me of a kid in a games store I encountered a few years ago. He took one look at my Squat army on the table and asked me "What wrong man? Are you too cheap to buy new miniatures?" He, like you, simply did not get it.

Others have pointed out some very good reasons why people still use OOP models, I will list my own reasons:
-Different tastes. Some people simply prefer the older sculpts. Others think (as I do) that the newer scuplts, while often of higher actual quality lack something in "character". Look at the current Space Ork figures and compare them to the old Kev Adams designs. While one could make a convincing argument as to the technical superiority of the newer sculpts, most people would agree that the OOP models have more character.
-Some of us have been in this game for a long, long time. In my case since 1989. I have a number of completely serviceable armies. Why should I be forced to buy new miniatures when my existing igures work just fine. If I spend a moment of two explaining a few odd figures most REASONABLE opponents are not going to have any trouble understanding my army.
-GW has changed for the worse over the years. As Reabe points out, the older models to indeed represent a time when GW was a much nicer company to do business with.
-Over the years GW has removed certain units and n some cases entire armies from 40k and WFB. OOP models help fill the holes created by this. GW even (no doubt grudingly) accept this fact and makes provisions for it in their "proxy" and "counts as" rule. Most people do not have a problem with this. I suppose you do. Should I be barred from using my Squats or Space Slaan simply because they were written out of the game years ago? Should I refrain from using my old Melnibonean figures as heros in my High elf army simply because those sculpts have been OOP since the late '80s? Should I throw away my Pygmies since GW no longer would dare produce such delightfully non-PC models? Do you really think that?


So its coming down to an issue of not having to pay for the "proper" mini then? even if it means using a mini which essentially doesnt exist, in game, anymore?

I cannot express (without getting a strike that is) the utter contempt I have for the above statement. Who are YOU to tell me what a "proper miniature" and what is not?


I mean, I would personally hate it if before a game someone went "well this represents this" for his whole army. That would bug the crap out of me.

And what would you do? Childishly refuse to play the vet with the nasty old figures? Please....
It takes just a few moments to explain a fully "counts as" army. Only an ADHD patient or a complete GW yes-man would have trouble with that.

That all being said, I understand were this comes from. It's either the naivety of youth or you have bought into what GW wants you to think. Gw hates the use of OOP models by veteran gamers and would like nothing more than to see use all throw out our old miniatures and buy new armies. you can see it in the attitudes of their staff and articles like the "40k revised" articles that apeared in White Dwarf last year. Hell, they even trired to enforce it at one point. For about six months after the release of 3rd edition 40k they adopted a "current models only" policy for in-store gaming and tournies. (something I'm still waiting for our resident GW apologists to try to justify or to even come out in favor of) However widespread outcry caused them to change the policy to the current "any Citadel miniature" rule soon after.

Happily your attitude is very much a minority view. I have only encountered a handful of players who resented my use of older miniatures in all my years. (such as the previously mentioned kid and the player who accused me of trying to cheat by using an OOP Keeper of Secrets in a 40k game) Most players i encounter are enthusiastic about seeing the older stuff and think they have a high "cool factor".

Finally...Sleazy nailed it when he said the following:

Who are you to say "dont use OOP minis"?, either a GW stooge or someone who hasnt been around long enough to have any love for miniatures that dont fall into current dogma

"Trench Raider"

Sir_Turalyon
20-03-2006, 22:43
The old miniatures are often more characterful (Goffik rok band, enough said), are more varied (20-30 different metal regimental models instead of one box of multi-pose plastics which all look alike anyway). Besides, while some armies miniatutres improve in time (all kinds of elves, eldar, Space Marines in general), others have reached and passed their pinnacles long ago (orks in RT-2nd, imperial guard in 2nd/early 3rd ed, bretonnians in 5th/3rd ed, undead in 3rd edition)

Ivan Stupidor
20-03-2006, 23:25
I'm going to try my best not to savagely flame the original poster to the point he cries and runs home. I think he deserves that. But I will refrain from doing so, just to keep the peace.


Heh. As I crafted my reply, I was thinking "Ooh, you're in for it when that irascible curmudgeon* Trench Raider sees this..."


*Okay, I didn't actually think "irascible curmudgeon", but it's a term I haven't used in a long time, and I really felt like typing it out. Besides, it's fun to say.

Gaebriel
20-03-2006, 23:41
Most old minis are metal - that's where it's at (at least for me... ;) ).

Trench_Raider
21-03-2006, 00:01
Heh. As I crafted my reply, I was thinking "Ooh, you're in for it when that irascible curmudgeon* Trench Raider sees this..."


*Okay, I didn't actually think "irascible curmudgeon", but it's a term I haven't used in a long time, and I really felt like typing it out. Besides, it's fun to say.

hehe.
I'm glad that I came to mind. :D
I must admit that at times I do enjoy being part of this site's folk lore...

Before anyone accuses me of coming down too hard on the original poster, let me point out that in reality I let the kid off quite lightly. Anyone who has known me for any length of time will confirm this. He's quite fortunate he did not catch me about three years ago on a bad day....

One final point:

(Goffik rok band, enough said)
heh.
While i do love the old Kev Adams sculpts, I must say I do not like the Goffik Rokkers. They come from GW's fortunately short lived "Rock and Roll" stage. You may recall this period in the late '80s/early '90s in which GW produced stuff like the those figs and the original noise marines, all the studio staff sported mop tops or mullets and scowled at the camera (it must have been part of the contract fr employment. I recal seeing a picture of Tim Prow when he first hired on. His first picture showed a clean cut smiling young man. In his later photos he scowled at the camera and each mont his mullet grew longer and longer!) , and they even had their own in house metal band.

So, I suppose the good old days were not always better....

"Trench Raider"

Quin 242
21-03-2006, 00:22
Because some of us have whole armies of figs that have character and thet we enjoy working on.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v395/Quin242/SquatPlatoon1-2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v395/Quin242/SquatPlatoon1.jpg

And we wouldn't be able to use our Mole mortars:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v395/Quin242/SquatMoleMortars2.jpg

Or Thudd Guns like in this Command Squad pic:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v395/Quin242/SquatCommand1.jpg

Quin 242
21-03-2006, 00:23
And we wouldn't have cool new pilots for our Sentinals...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v395/Quin242/Sentinels2.jpg

And with only NEW parts none of our conversions would look different. I can honestly say that there is SMALL chance that anyone has the same DP as me: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v395/Quin242/DP01.jpg

and if we all just SELL our OLD models there's no reason to make a Version 1.5 of stuff we already have:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v395/Quin242/MkI_11.jpg

There's more but that's just a small selection of why Old models are still around.

Trench_Raider
21-03-2006, 00:25
*salutes Quin 242*

Very nice....

"Trench Raider"

Bloodknight
21-03-2006, 00:47
Well, there are sometimes Minis which look definitely better than the newer ones of their type.
I deliberately built my Deathguard with 2nd edition Plague Marines - reason: Pickelhaube, hooves and fat belly look ace when compared to the jelly on thin legs in armour which the current ones are .
I am also building an Emperor“s Children army at the moment with only 2nd edition Noise marines, as these are far more characterful than the current Slaanesh marines, which are just the normal ones with other guns. I also bought the old head for the Keeper of secrets, because a goat-head looks far more slaaneshi than a guy with a squid in his face. And for the record: my first IG is Mordian Iron Guard, because I cannot stand those bland scifi-soldier Cadians. They just look so cowardly in their armour *g*.

DrDoom
21-03-2006, 01:41
Because old models (especially the Chaos ones) look amazing. They add alot of character to a force by just being put on the table. Plus they're all metal, which helps.

Opus T. Penguin
21-03-2006, 03:04
I gotta think this thread is a troll, but 'ere goes:


Because old models (especially the Chaos ones) look amazing.

Exactly what I was thinking. GW, quite bluntly, has done *nothing* that compares to the old chaos stuff since it was done in the late 1980s. It's called "the Golden Age of GW" for a reason :p

In general, the new figures are overpriced for what you get and not an improvement. Another line that was better back then was the Fantasy Dwarves -- from the Norse Dwarves to the Marauder stuff.

But yes, it comes down to personal preference, I suppose. I prefer the old figs.

Taliesynkp
21-03-2006, 03:11
And what would you do? Childishly refuse to play the vet with the nasty old figures? Please....
It takes just a few moments to explain a fully "counts as" army. Only an ADHD patient or a complete GW yes-man would have trouble with that.


"Trench Raider"

How would it come to that, Trench? Wouldn't you have already said, "Kid, this store isn't a baby-sitting service. Go away."

Tal

Ardathair
21-03-2006, 03:16
It is not a case of resurecting old models. This is my point of view.

If I spend money to buy models, spend time to paint them, and in some cases name them, why should I just throw them away or put them in a case and stare at them saying "I remember when I could use these."?

Why should I shelve 30 terminators, 60 beaky marines, 20 scouts, 3 Land Speeders, a Land Raider, 4 Rhinos, and 3 Bikes (a few hundred dolars investment, not to mention the time to paint them all) just to go out and buy the newest models? And that is just one of my armies.

I do like to have my armies look like armies not just a random assortment of models. So why would I want to field modern Land Speeders which are twice the size of my current ones. NO I will either get some more original style or do without.

I know that this is not the case with all people promoting the new models, but most players I have heard talk down about how bad the oop minis look don't have their armies painted. So I've got a kid dropping out unpainted and half painted minis and he's talking about how bad my stuff looks.:wtf:

Delicious Soy
21-03-2006, 04:21
Really I find the current models as hit and miss as previous models, the new termie chaplain is better than the old one but the current Striking Scorpions pale in comparison to the 2nd ed ones.

Occulto
21-03-2006, 04:35
Most old minis are metal - that's where it's at (at least for me... ;) ).

:D

Too right.

Trench_Raider
21-03-2006, 05:13
Opus:

I gotta think this thread is a troll, but 'ere goes:


Eh. Possibly. But then again, he only has a handful of posts. he might just be new. In any event, it's nice to be given the oportunity to discuss this issue.


Exactly what I was thinking. GW, quite bluntly, has done *nothing* that compares to the old chaos stuff since it was done in the late 1980s. It's called "the Golden Age of GW" for a reason

I agree 100% of course. The figures featured in the two Realm of Chaos books are how chaos should be, not this bland, semi-uniform crap that they pawn off today. The best looking chaos army in the current edition Hordes of Chaos book was Andy Chanber's "Crow Bretheren".
For those who don;t know what we are talking about, take a look at these links and tell me that the new sculpts can touch them:
http://www.solegends.com/citcat912/c20268rcchaoswarr-h.htm
http://www.solegends.com/citcat912/c20269rcchaoswarr-h.htm
http://www.solegends.com/citcat912/c20270rcchaoswarr-h.htm
http://www.solegends.com/citcat912/c20273rcchaosknight-h.htm
And these are just a few of a very large line.

Taliesynkp:
Hehehe...fair enough. To be honest I usually will not play a kid under about 18 or so anyway.

Finally, I fully agree with those who have commented about metal figures. I avoid plastics were at all possible. They feel better and just simply "seem right" to me. As I don't do much converting at all, I really don't miss using plastics. My growing fantasy orc army has all of about a dozen old plastic in it for example.

"Trench Raider"

Jedi152
21-03-2006, 07:11
Why is it that a lot of gamers want to use old mini's that are not made anymore and dont have any stats for the new system? So they take a mini they may have liked and try to fit it to something close to what it was. It no longer exisists in the game play so why use it? I see this floating about in forums all the time, but I just dont understand. I mean if it was a good model and still had stats in the new system of play, say a space marine, then yay I could see it being used. But why try to resurrect something from the dead?
One statement i can deduce from this: You've obviously not been in this hobby very long.

You live in an age of plastic GW kits, of everything standard and WYSIWYG. You wouldn't understand. You had to be there.

Mini's had character. It didn't matter if they didn't have the weapons they're supposed to - it didn't matter that one of the old SM scouts had a shuriken catapult, and one a lasgun; and most had weapons you couldn't even recognise.

Finn Sourscowl
21-03-2006, 07:49
Hmmm... for me it's mainly to do with memories. I started gaming in 1990 during the so-called "rock and roll" phase (I still listen to D-Rok... they had some amazing tunes!)... and I guess I look back on the minatures that were around then fond memories. As has already been said, they often had lots more character than current ones! All of my armies (with the exception of my Ogres) have old minatures in... my Space Marine army is entirely 2nd Ed or earlier. Should I replace the whole thing, just 'cause someone doesn't like womble marines?

Griefbringer
21-03-2006, 08:12
ok, some of the older mini's look good, but a lot of them dont.

The very same thing could be said for a lot of the new miniatures, too.

It might all be in the eye of the beholder - different people like different models, and it is not just about the age of the models. Look at Warseer talk on new releases - for every new release, there are a number of people who are drooling on it and a number of people who are stating they do not really like them.

Also, I think everyone's investment (of time, money and effort) in a miniature army deserves respect. To buy, assemble and paint a 100+ models is not a trivial feat, and that player definitely deserves to get to game with them without having to suffer from excessive ridiculing, snobbery or fanboyism. Whether the models are new or old, whether the paint job is perfect or not, whether the miniatures are super cool or not - those are immaterial, it is the effort and love of miniatures that deserves the respect.

Bob Hunk
21-03-2006, 08:28
The idea that if you use old minis you are 'cheap' is laughable. Genestealer Hybrids aren't cheap to get hold of these days! *Shakes fist angrily at young whipper-snappers*
Old minis are good because:
1. Character,
2. Weight (it's more satisfying to pick-up metal models than plastic ones).
Although having said that I'm not a big fan of the 2nd edition plastics.
So what everyone else said basically. :)

Gaebriel
21-03-2006, 08:35
Although I am fairly new to GW games compared to some people (having only started about 2000), I have to say that I go out of my way to collect and find old miniatures for my armies. ...
Likewise, though in my case it's got to do with me giving all my older models away ten years ago :p:(


... Son, (as I strongly suspect you are a very young person) you rather remind me of a kid in a games store I encountered a few years ago. He took one look at my Squat army on the table and asked me "What wrong man? Are you too cheap to buy new miniatures?" He, like you, simply did not get it. ...
And tying in with this - anyone have a look at my army and then call me cheap with their €24,95 Land speeders, while I spend €34,95 on the classic model, and that is just one of many examples (not long ago, a standard Tactical Marine cost me about €7,50).

snurl
21-03-2006, 08:42
Besides, everyone knows that Metal miniatures make the BEST
HEAVY INFANTRY

Keravin
21-03-2006, 08:51
Even with the new Wood Elves for example there is no way I would junk the gorgeous Goodwin older archers.

I have nearly 4 full companies of Marines for different armies and some of those are all brand new marines, whilst others are a mix of the original plastics and the new ones. Why would I throw out almost 100 marines just because they don't look the same as the new ones?

I've been doing this hobby almost 30 years and yes there are some models I'd have difficulty finding a fit for (though I'm trying to sort my jetbikes into an Ad-Mech army), but the point of this whole hobby is supposed to have fun rather than follow the party line.

Orbital
21-03-2006, 09:23
It's kind of like music. I have lots of music on my iPod from 2005/2006. That's the new stuff. I also have Otis Redding's "Dock Of The Bay" on my favorites list and it gets played every other day or so. The new stuff is great, but the old stuff is also great. You don't have to choose between them. That's the good thing.

Dr Death
21-03-2006, 09:36
Why do i use old mini's? Because they're good:D! Despite whatever people may say about sculpting quality getting better, the general look and feel of the older models is just second to none. As Reabe has pointed out, it harks back to a day when GW gave a rats **** about veterans and it shows in the quality of the miniatures. Most of the newer ranges look so phoney and mass produced its not funny, their relentless release schedule prevents them from truly reaching the heights of design they were at back then.

For myself im not old enough or long enough a gamer (8 years is never long enough!;)) to have clingings to rouge trader miniatures for nostalgic value but if a sculpt works for me, then sure i will buy it and paint it.

Some of the best examples of better old miniatures actually come from my first love- Warhammer fantasy. The 5th edition Brettonians (quite probably before, but i only knew them from the edition i entered on) are something to beat and have a level of detail and design fluency that no modern model comes close to (you wont get a matching knight, horse head and sheild on a model nowadays!)

Equally the old marauder skaven models look far more scavanged and arcane (not to mention anatomically correct) than any modern model and i have yet to see GW churn out a greyseer that matches the aged Gnawdoom model or any of that ilk.

I fully support advance and will sing the praises of a new model if it "speaks" to me, indeed i have far too many debts to some of the earlier multi part plastic sprues, including Jes Goodwins revolutionary Space Marines (though even those are as old as i've been gaming). But generally, the talent just doesnt seem to be there any more, and so i have to make the decision- do i want new models or good models?

Dr Death

Smoking Frog
21-03-2006, 09:59
End of the day, it's all a matter of taste. Sometimes nostalgia too...

We have folks who love the old models because of the feelings past, others who like them because of memories, some like their uniqueness in this day and age.

Personally, I came into the hobby just as second ed was phasing out, but I managed to acquire earlier models before they were sold out, I like them because they were the first things I bought. A Dark Angels captain with the crazy feathers, and some metal marines, along with three rhinos, a pred and the Angels of Death Codex. I keep them, and still use them, because they look so different. Sure, I've got a whole bunch of new minis next to the old ones, but that's because I like them too.

No new miniature is as good, IMHO, as my Dark Angels captain, even though I adore some of the new stuff. But, it's my opinion. When it comes to something as subjective as miniatures, it's what counts.

:)

Sir_Turalyon
21-03-2006, 11:07
heh.
While i do love the old Kev Adams sculpts, I must say I do not like the Goffik Rokkers. They come from GW's fortunately short lived "Rock and Roll" stage. You may recall this period in the late '80s/early '90s in which GW produced stuff like the those figs and the original noise marines, all the studio staff sported mop tops or mullets and scowled at the camera (it must have been part of the contract fr employment. I recal seeing a picture of Tim Prow when he first hired on. His first picture showed a clean cut smiling young man. In his later photos he scowled at the camera and each mont his mullet grew longer and longer!) , and they even had their own in house metal band.


I know what you're talking about, and I agree if there were once whole armies made in this style, it would be plain stupid. But there were few enough of these miniatures to make them look original (if predictable) and today they look both original and imaginative compared to modern counterparts.

Heck, give me six original bass-guitarr noise marines and I'll start Emperors Children just to use them.

Rhys
21-03-2006, 12:01
I really like the old Chaos renegade miniatures. They looked much more chaotic that the current bunch of miniatures. Quality wise they arent as good but they have a style all their own.

I even have Chaos Renegades on horseback! Doubt we'll see the likes of them again.

Chuffy
21-03-2006, 12:55
Equally the old marauder skaven models look far more scavanged and arcane (not to mention anatomically correct) than any modern model and i have yet to see GW churn out a greyseer that matches the aged Gnawdoom model or any of that ilk.

I agree, the old Skaven models were simply fantastic! Gutter runner with net, warlord with three arms...those far outstrip ANYTHING in the current range, really they do.

Lord Lucifer
21-03-2006, 13:04
It no longer exisists in the game play so why use it?
Because I paid good money for it. Pure and simple.


I have a runtbot, tiny little pint-sized baby-dred. I use it as a 'slaver' (Runtherd!) because it is cool (based on a poll of people I use it against).
It's very rare to find anyone with a runtbot in their army. I have one, and as I have one it therefore logically follows that I use it.



I've never been one for the WYSIWYG mentality. Give me an interesting and unique army to square off against. When I look at an army, I don't want to go "Hey, that combination of equipment looks sensible". I want to go "Hey, that's pretty cool, where'd you get it? Where's you get the idea?"
Remember, it's a hobby, not a profession ;)

Sai-Lauren
21-03-2006, 13:07
If some one did the "You too cheap?" on me, they'd get "What, you didn't realise that to represent their status as veterans, they get +1 to all stats for each edition they are older than the current one? And as it's now officially 4th edition, those RTB01 marines have 7s for most of their stats"
:angel:
:D

Some are certainly better sculpts than newer figures, then there's nostalgia (see that figure, he single handedly defeated a 'stealer brood in one battle, winning me the game, and the one next to him survived no less than 8 las cannon shots in a different battle, and the heavy weapon trooper has 10 Land Raiders to his credit, and more than that of every other vehicle that exists, and...)
And then you've got the fact that you own figures that are older than your opponent.;)

Adept
21-03-2006, 14:01
So its coming down to an issue of not having to pay for the "proper" mini then? even if it means using a mini which essentially doesnt exist, in game, anymore?
I mean, I would personally hate it if before a game someone went "well this represents this" for his whole army. That would bug the crap out of me.

Imagine if your favourite army (or perhaps only army) was, overnight, erased by GW. They didn't redo your codex, left you out of the rulebook, and prohibited your list from being used at any and all GW stores and events.

Would you sell all your old models, and buy/model/paint a whole new force?

SallieKiller
21-03-2006, 14:40
I guess I didnt post my thoughts very well. It wasnt about using old models that are still in game but have a new model, say old land raiders and such, it was about models that dont have any stats in game anymore. And mainly I wanted to see what brought on that "passion". I guess my post wasnt very good, but it did bring up great reason. This being my favorite one...



Also, I think everyone's investment (of time, money and effort) in a miniature army deserves respect. To buy, assemble and paint a 100+ models is not a trivial feat, and that player definitely deserves to get to game with them without having to suffer from excessive ridiculing, snobbery or fanboyism. Whether the models are new or old, whether the paint job is perfect or not, whether the miniatures are super cool or not - those are immaterial, it is the effort and love of miniatures that deserves the respect.

This statement pretty much alone changed my view of a lot of posters on here and was more of what I was searching for.I think that explains miniature gaming in general and was kind of what I was looking for. Something more than why cant I.

I was just asking about the cost. I never called anyone cheap for not buying new models. I was inquiring because the previous posts both mentioned prices.

Another note, I actually like a lot of the old models and contrary to popular belief I have been around a little while, though I just got back into it a few years ago. And if I checked my garage I bet I could still find some old mini's in boxes that have been hiding for years.

As much as people thought I was jumping to conclusions I feel that they were so passionate about the hobby that they didnt bother to realize that I was inquiring about "proper" mini's and not saying there were "proper" mini's. And in turn jumped to far greater conclusions. I guess I was digging for more than "they are cooler than new minis". And I found that in abundance and have a newer respect for some of the posters to this forum.

So again I apologize for a BAD beginning post, and not being clear on what I was asking, although I did find it entertaining to read and found some insights to a lot of posters here.

Jellicoe
21-03-2006, 15:40
Old models, heavens no I have never stopped using them. having spent a period in the mid to late nineties in the wilderness I have been having a GW renaissance over the last 4-5 years. So yup my marine army is principally RTB01 marine with the original metal dreadnoughts and landspeeder (the one you got in a box with a tarantula and a mole mortar) They desperately need a dipping and a better paint job but I love using them again. Value for money and nostalgia for RT in one go! As for WHFB, I am waiting for 7th (and the builders to finish on sorting out the house) before ressurecting what is an old treasure trove of figs. Not played fantasy since 3rd and I started with 1st ed, a good proportion of my Orcs and Dark elves are the 1st regiments of renown - lead bases! Citadel did some lovely stuff then and some brilliant affiliated ranges. Does anyone remember Nick Lund's Chronicle minatures, his orc wolf riders and his ogres were fantastic, have to use them as gobbos now as the scale has changed but still the heft of that lead in your hand is a great feeling

best go and change my incontinence pad now and go and find my slippers and pipe

Some guy (UK)
21-03-2006, 16:12
I dont have any old mini's, as mainly I have been gamming since 03. But what I have learnt is this. The majority of gamers will have the biggest soft spot for the models they first bought/played/ painted. Its just the way it is. I dont mind the old models, and if I played I would not be bothered if someone used old models to represent a particular army. Their army, their choice.

However, what would annoy me is someone that complains I am using newer models, and spends the whole match going on about the good 'ol days. Sod off ;)

I dont plan to buy and old school models, as the best ones from those eras are very expensive to purchase off sites like E-bay. For example, Squats go for a small fortune. Once I saw a bunch of 3 or so going for 20 quid! :eek:

At this current time, I do not have the need to pay, or the funds to buy such models. Maybe one day I will.

@Trenchie, in your first post in this thread, you stated that you would have liked to flame the guy who started the thread. Why is this? Yes, he offended people by saying people who use older models are cheap and the like, but he was merely wondering at why people buy such models. Surely it was possible to over look these offensive points and see what he was actually asking. Yes you did, but only because of the possible strike.

Later, Some Guy (UK)

Spacemunkie
21-03-2006, 16:35
This is why:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v720/marineboy/RTSpaceMarinePlasmaGunner.jpg

Paintjob by Simon Bradley aka Sturmhalo.

Some guy (UK)
21-03-2006, 16:53
But without that paintjob that model IMO would have no character, the model just being a well... space marine. I think its rather the paintjob, than the model, that makes that particular mini stand out.

Later, Some Guy (UK)

Spacemunkie
21-03-2006, 17:01
No character???

Look at his face!!!!

It's not covered in oodles of tat like contemporary marines, but this chap exemplifies the adage that less is quite often more. As a painter you are not being dictated to by some sculptor who is treating the piece like some sort of 20 minute guitar solo.

RGB
21-03-2006, 17:26
"Character" is just an English/cheap way of saying "je ne sais quoi" and thus is COMPLETELY meaningless as an argument. It's nostalgia at best, snobbery at worst. Like those Chaos Warriors somebody posted - I'm sure that unless you were there in the 1980s you'll need about 3 seconds to conclude they're on the ugly and corny side of things.

Mind, I am nostalgic about a lot of things I did when I was a pre-teen as well, so that's understandable. I mean, I hated polygon technology when it came out and argued with all my friends that computer games should be about gameplay and that pixels was all there ever need be.

So spare everyone the lectures on "Character", I doubt that enough people are stupid enough to fall to this kind of bullying. It's a very subjective thing, and the bias is clearly on one side of the argument.

I haven't been collecting for too long a time and thus haven't, perhaps, got emotionally attached to my old figs, but I will unequivocally say that most of the new sculpts are better where Fantasy is concerned and that plastic beats metal bloody and senseless in every department. I don't want heavy, fragile, overcosted minis, I want customizable ones.

I therefore had no remorse when I chopped up all my 3rd/4th ed. WE and re-assembled them with help from what came in the new Glade Rider sprue. They look better now.

Spacemunkie
21-03-2006, 17:43
It has nothing to do with snobbery. It is, of course, a matter of taste. I happen to like clean, uncluttered lines.

Why is expressing an opinion considered 'bullying' around here? Your 'unequivocal' opinions are just that - opinion. They carry as little weight around here as the miniatures you love!

Give me pewter any day of the week!

ashc
21-03-2006, 17:46
I always look at the older miniatures when it comes to special things like HQs and Characters, and if im out to do a specific project. alot of the character models just have no character these days.

Ash

RGB
21-03-2006, 17:47
Repeating things forcefully and loudly and threatening to flame the topic poster in the name of "character" and "you don't understand" is, in fact, bullying to get your opinion across.

And my opinon weighs as much as yours, no matter what my minis are like.

Spacemunkie
21-03-2006, 17:52
lol

Exactly!

simonr1978
21-03-2006, 18:00
I respectfully disagree. To me the models of the RT era are better and more characterful than the current batch in most cases. I fully agree with Space Munkie, and it's not just about nostalgia, although that certainly plays a part, the models were in my opinion just better. Proportions were better pre-Hero scale, weapons seem to have creeped larger and larger to the point of being comical. Now the word "Scale" seems meaningless when applied to the current crop.

A model's Character is hard to define but that doesn't make it a worthless argument, to me it is about the general feeling of the models and the RT era models being individually sculpted and simpler had a more soldierly feeling to me. Not just variations on the same sprue but individuals in their own right. Umpteen similar poses of the same model of the same plastic sprue adorned in the same ridiculous tat is lacking in character and is not soldierly, so not characterful for a Toy soldier.

Sorry but I think Chaos has got cheesier, not less cheesy, the old models looked corrupted on an individual scale, not like the mass-produced looking stuff of the current editions. I wasn't there in the 80s, I got into 40K in the early 1990s just a few years before 2nd Ed and the Spikey=Evil phase hit GW, now that was Cheesy.

I have also yet to use a Fragile metal miniature (And this is considering that many have been "borrowed" over the last few years by my son, he is just 5), on the other hand I have had my plastic figures broken or snapped in much less time by me on my own. I really don't seen how multipart Plastic can be considered less fragile than one or two piece lead castings...

That is subjective to be sure, but it isn't bullying to post an opinion on a discussion group, that is afterall what the likes of Warseer are here for.

Trench_Raider
21-03-2006, 18:03
RGB:

Like those Chaos Warriors somebody posted - I'm sure that unless you were there in the 1980s you'll need about 3 seconds to conclude they're on the ugly and corny side of things.


That would have been me.

Your opinion has been noted. However it is not shared by everyone. I have encountered many people who were not first exposed to the older figures when I was that still consider them to be better. Personally, I don't see the apeal of the new uniform chaos figures when compared to the tradional look.



and argued with all my friends that computer games should be about gameplay and that pixels was all there ever need be.


It is about gameplay. The old Infocom text games were amongst the most enjoyable computer games I have ever played. This may seem off topic, but it does explain a difference between you and me: you prefer flash to substance.


that plastic beats metal bloody and senseless in every department. I don't want heavy, fragile, overcosted minis, I want customizable ones.


The above stament is flawed on a variety of levels. About the only real argument one can make for plastic is the customability one. And this is far from universal. For example, I do almost no converting work on my miniatures. I find sculpts I like the look of and make limited if any changes. heavy is actually a benefit rather than a flaw as any one who has had their table jarred during game play will confirm. Then their is that nice satisfying "heft" that is really hard to describe. The fragile argument is non-existant when you are not talking about large multi-part models. One piece metal models have superior durability to any plastic sculpt. As to cost, that is also a flawed argument. The only reason metal models cost more is because GW has set the prices to insane levels. At present it is finatially impossible for most players to build an all metal army. This is not the case with other company's figures or if one buys second hand and OOP stuff. I'm sitting on almost 300 metal GW orcs at the moment that I aquired through trades and Ebay. The total price tag was probably less than what it would cost me to buy a current mostly plastic orc army.

There is nothing wrong with liking plastic over metal, but at least justify it with reasons that makes sense.

"Trench Raider"

Crazy Harborc
21-03-2006, 18:23
You bought them, got them ready to use. They were just lumps of molded metal or plastic until you made them look like minies.

I do agree that a company (GW) can require that you use their minies at their events or in their stores. BUT......you "must" use the new improved whatever minie that will be changed again in another 2/4 years???:wtf: Not gonna happen.

Once upon a time their were Dwarves in 40K. I knew/know four 40K players who were spending yearly at least $800(USA) each on GW products. These guys were Squats players as well as other armies in 40K.

GW had a sale on Squats, great deals on all the stuff. Then within a few weeks along came the new improved 40K rules. No more Squats:wtf: Basicly GW spit on those guys for being GW minie buyers. Real smart way to keep longtime/veteran customers.:rolleyes:

RGB
21-03-2006, 18:24
Well, I actually like substance and flash is of secondary importance to me, and I wonder what I said to get that comment. I thought I said that I thought pixels were better than flash as long as the gameplay was better, and I still play Hearts of Iron more than anything modern-looking. Certainly reading what I wrote shouldn;t give you that impression, unless you didn't actually read what I said, which is okay, we all skim sometimes.

There's yet to be one post in all of this forum where I said that "cool" is good. I'm rather annoying in insisting on background/internal consistency and army theming and so on. And yes, I do appreciate an interesting theme over a better-proportioned sculpt (and thus I prefer the Big Hats to Chaos Cannon Crew).

As to plastic - I prefer plastic since I just can't not convert, it's a major part of the hobby for me. I've maybe 5 or 6 models that weren't somehow adulterated. Metal is hard to convert and have you ever tried dropping one of them if they've been glued from several parts? Egads, you have to glue it again. And paint it again. And superglue be damned. Metal swords and metal lances are also terrible, since they bend all the time and if you straighten it once too often they just snap and unlike plastic you can't easily replace them or re-glue them.

Bases are there to prevent plastic minis from tumbling as well. And plastic minis don't usually have balance problems. And I didn't have the luxury or collecting for 10 years or so (I was a very poor kid for most of the 1990s).

New chaos sculpts - the trick in letting them have "character" and "variety" is to do some minor conversions. They really work wonders.

All that said, I did really like the old Mordheim Empire and Kislev range, and their equivalent hasn't yet been made (Well, just because it hasn't. They've never tried replacing them. And the old ones were good.)

Sharky
21-03-2006, 18:41
Why do we like old minis? Because they have character. Just about everything coming out of GW these days is "Grim this and grim that." and that's about as exciting as watching paint dry. If I want angst, I'll tease some Goths.

RGB
21-03-2006, 18:47
So, besides the "je ne sais quoi" nobody has any arguments?

Thought so. Must be one of them subjective things then.

The one thing that really annoys me is the difference in size between the old and the new minis, or even between different sprues. They should really try to keep that consistent.

Some guy (UK)
21-03-2006, 18:57
No character???
Look at his face!!!!


His face looks like a cross between a dwarf, a goblin, and a human to me. I mean if that floats your boat thats fine with me.

Also on the point of plastic models- if you dont like the 'clone' look, then convert some of them. It's not hard to make a purity seal, or stick some extra equipment on, or stick on a different head. And please dont say that you can't convert- that means you can't glue ;)

Later, Some Guy (UK)

simonr1978
21-03-2006, 18:59
But there is no consistency and to be honest I don't think there ever was. In RT the WHFB world was within the 40K universe and the two were more or less interchangable. Infact you could roll on the WHFB retinue table instead of the WH40K one for your Chaos Renegade's followers, allowing Lasgun armed Skeletons, Skaven with Autoguns, etc... Now, oh no, there's no overlap at all. :rolleyes:

Tau, yep they've been there for hundreds of years, apart from five or six years back when they were a glint in the developer's eyes.

Necrons, an ancient menace around for countless millenia, apart from ten years back when no-one had ever heard of them.

Squats, one of the core 40K races... No they're not they were suddenly wiped out... honest. And no arguing, every last one of them's gone, OK?!?

Seriously, if you want consistency, go play something else, you wont get it in 40K, or pretty much any GW game. As far as 40K's concerned Consistency died shortly after the Rogue Trader book came out.

Sharky
21-03-2006, 19:00
So, besides the "je ne sais quoi" nobody has any arguments?

Thought so. Must be one of them subjective things then.

Did you even bother reading the first page of this thread? Lots of people gave concrete reasons for using them.


While i do love the old Kev Adams sculpts, I must say I do not like the Goffik Rokkers. They come from GW's fortunately short lived "Rock and Roll" stage.

Ooohhh, you're in for it now! The next time you see my Orc army, it's going to have the Rokkerz as musicians in the big units!

simonr1978
21-03-2006, 19:02
His face looks like a cross between a dwarf, a goblin, and a human to me. I mean if that floats your boat thats fine with me.

Also on the point of plastic models- if you dont like the 'clone' look, then convert some of them. It's not hard to make a purity seal, or stick some extra equipment on, or stick on a different head. And please dont say that you can't convert- that means you can't glue ;)

Later, Some Guy (UK)

Purity seals are frankly a nonsense to begin with, and why convert when you could have a fairly individual looking army ready to paint. That was part of the appeal of the classic models to begin with.

RGB
21-03-2006, 19:10
Did you even bother reading the first page of this thread? Lots of people gave concrete reasons for using them.

Well, I apologise for not explaining myself clearly, but you misunderstand. The only thing I'm talking about is "character" which ostensibly makes old minis superior.

The rest of the arguments were sensible and the original poster got several good responses as to why it is unfair to disallow old minis. "Character" wasn't oneof them, however.

bertcom1
21-03-2006, 19:28
I play Sisters of Battle.

The new veteran sister superiors look a bit 'off' compared to the rest of the models. There is nothing wrong with the new models, but they just don't look 100% right when put into units. Same with the new special weapon sisters.

On their own, there is nothing wrong with them, but put them in a unit and something is pulling at my eye. Something doesn't quite match, and it bugs the hell out of me because I cannot see what it is.

Accordingly, I prefer the older Sister of Battle models, which are not on the online store anymore.



As for disallowing old models, that is nonsense, but not 100% nonsense. I would sooner see small painted armies of old models fight it out, rather than legions of unpainted new models.
The shops here are starting to insist that models for instore gaming should be painted. This is sensible, as unpainted things are a bad advert to potential purchasers. Unpainted obsolete models are a terrible advert to potential new players. Painted models are a good advert, and painted old models are a better one, as they show the hobby has future to it and isnt a fad.
That's my opinions.

Some guy (UK)
21-03-2006, 19:47
Purity seals are frankly a nonsense to begin with, and why convert when you could have a fairly individual looking army ready to paint. That was part of the appeal of the classic models to begin with.

Well don't use purity seals, it was just an example. And converting means putting in more time and effort into the army, so you get value for your money. Also, if everyone buys the same 'individual' models, everyone has them. I'd rather add my own personal touch to them than the sculptor doing so.

Think of the new plastics as blank canvases to do your thing on, be creative, have fun with.

Later, Some guy (UK)

Trench_Raider
21-03-2006, 21:02
Ooohhh, you're in for it now! The next time you see my Orc army, it's going to have the Rokkerz as musicians in the big units!


Heh.
That is an amusing idea. That does not change the fact that I will kill you if you do it. But it IS funny! :p

Some guy (UK)-
That is all well and good, but some of us really don't care for converting as much as others. I can get as much individuality from my paintjob as a massive converiosn. For those who think that way, metals are indeed superior.


"Trench Raider"

Some guy (UK)
21-03-2006, 21:14
Well there you go, if you don't like the plastic too much, just paint them in an interesting scheme- if its good enoguh, each model will be an individual. And like I said 'conversions' dont have to be hard, it can just be sticking extra equipment on. I'm saying the old models aren't individual, just that the plastics can be made so too :)

Later, Some Guy (UK)

bertcom1
21-03-2006, 21:21
Individuality is hard for all metal models, as there are only a few sculpts.

But it is also hard for some of the plastics, as some of them can only be put together 1 way.

Example Cadians. The hands are moulded onto the guns. No real opportunity to vary pose, defeating purpose of multi-part plastic.

Gaebriel
21-03-2006, 22:32
... plastic beats metal bloody and senseless in every department. I don't want heavy, fragile, overcosted minis, I want customizable ones. ...
Well, I know how to use an Xacto knife and needle files and usually resculpt and convert metals with ease. And it's much easier to carve something new out of somewhat resisting metal than out of plastics, as far as I experienced.

Metal is better than plastic in at least one regard : I can snip a plastic model over the room with two fingers, but I would hurt those fingers trying to do that with a thoroughly weighted metal. My army doesn't tumble all over when someone sneezes...

Ziljin
21-03-2006, 22:48
Individuality is hard for all metal models, as there are only a few sculpts.

But it is also hard for some of the plastics, as some of them can only be put together 1 way.

Example Cadians. The hands are moulded onto the guns. No real opportunity to vary pose, defeating purpose of multi-part plastic.

Dammit, you are right. =(. This makes me doubt my interest in imperial guard.

The only reason I want to get some minis, is that they look cool. But if you can't really convert them much then I would waste my money. Maybe I should get some chaos space marines. those are mad easy to convert, they come with some nice mutation sprues. But I like the sprues of the cadian heavy weapon team. If you take those legs/arms you can create some variation in your cadians.

Ardathair
22-03-2006, 01:31
I'm into the old minis also because I like lead minis, not as much the pewter ones.

Lead is so much easier to convert and I am lazy when it comes to conversions. Cutting and drilling for pinning are so much easier with lead. Also try bending pewter, it breaks with some of what I have done and seen others do.

An old chaos Marine with a tail, a sword and pistol; bent the tail, replaced the sword and pistol; in pewter or plastic would have had to cut the tail and it would have taken longer without looking as good.

Eldar Dreadnought/Wraithlord; I've spread the fingers on one, looks like he's grabbing for something; seen one with its hand wrapped around another model; seen a few with interesting hand gestures. To do any of these conversions with pewter or plaster would mean cutting off the fingers and re-attatching them individually, probably wouldn't look as good and would take days instead of minutes.

When I field the armies they have primer, atleast one coat of paint, and clear coat. That is atleast three layers between the lead and anyone who handles it just before stuffing their face with pizza, chips, crisps, etc... So no lead poisoning unless your stupid enough to bite them; in which case you deserve to get poisoned or worse.

Ziljin
22-03-2006, 01:40
isn't lead dangerous?

Hashut's Li'l Helper
22-03-2006, 02:40
If you have lots of unpainted minis around and like to lick them.

mmmm just like candy, sweet sweet lead.

Ardathair
22-03-2006, 02:46
isn't lead dangerous?

Lead isn't radioactive like plutonium. Standing in the same room is perfectly safe.

Only when ingested. You don't get lead poisoning from touching lead but you do from eating or licking it. Touching lead and then eating finger food can be dangerous thus:


When I field the armies they have primer, atleast one coat of paint, and clear coat. That is atleast three layers between the lead and anyone who handles it just before stuffing their face with pizza, chips, crisps, etc... So no lead poisoning unless your stupid enough to bite them; in which case you deserve to get poisoned or worse.

RGB
22-03-2006, 03:00
If you have lots of unpainted minis around and like to lick them.

mmmm just like candy, sweet sweet lead.

I prefer it chopped up and in salad form. But then, I have troubles making lead salad, my ineptitude with the Xacto knife shows.

Trunks
22-03-2006, 04:06
As to plastic - I prefer plastic since I just can't not convert, it's a major part of the hobby for me. I've maybe 5 or 6 models that weren't somehow adulterated. Metal is hard to convert and have you ever tried dropping one of them if they've been glued from several parts? Egads, you have to glue it again. And paint it again. And superglue be damned. Metal swords and metal lances are also terrible, since they bend all the time and if you straighten it once too often they just snap and unlike plastic you can't easily replace them or re-glue them.

I love converting as well. However, I like metal more than plastic in many cases. It has nothing to do with this "weight" or "character" thing.

Metal allows for more detail. That is a big thing to me. GW is getting better at getting more detail in on plastics, however there is no way they could have made the current Waywatcher models (which are chock full of detail) out of plastic. I find chainmail looks way better when done in metal as well. Facial features tend to look better on metal models as well (particularly in the eye and nose area, although the Empire Militia are a huge exception and their heads are fantastic). Oh, and plastic hands tend to look worse than metal ones.

I dont' have the problem with metal things falling apart when I drop them for the most part. This may be because I pin every weak joint on a figure in most cases (and if I don't, I sure as hell do when it falls apart after falling :P).

Metal may be a bit more difficult to work with, but it has a better potential for detail. I'll admit, Plastics are getting more detailed as time goes on though.

I've never had the problem with metal swords bending at all. Lances, spears, and standards can be a bit problematic at times though on certain models.

Lord Lucifer
22-03-2006, 11:52
Well, I apologise for not explaining myself clearly, but you misunderstand. The only thing I'm talking about is "character" which ostensibly makes old minis superior.
Superior? The question is over people's fascination with old GW miniatures, and why people like them. Not why they're in any way better or not


'Character' here refers to a visual style the old GW figures had, that the new ones do not.

A lot of the old figures seem more individual than the recent ones, which makes them individually interesting.
The newer figures have a far more consistant style throughout the army, which benefits the army on the whole, but individually makes for what can be considered slightly boring examples.
Each has Pros and Cons, and everyone is entitled to their opinion and preference. And I hope GW continues to recognise this fact and respect the business of their established players who have stuck with the company for so long.


For me, I like a lot of old and a lot of new. I like the quality of sculpts we're getting, but I dislike the 'semi-monopose' phase we're getting here.
I'm a compulsive converter like you, RGB, I can't assemble a regiment with anything less than three seperate kits to work from :p
Which is why I hate what they're doing with the plastics. Customising and converting are the strength of plastics, and removing the option for easy conversion is counter-productive in my eyes.

On the flip side, I also love some of the old ranges. My 1st/2nd ed. Orks are treasured. Sure the quality of the sculpts is sketchy, but I still prefer them to the generic space-barbarians we've got now (which are also lovely, but don't embody Orkdom to the same degree, zog it!)
My Madboyz are awesome, the Shokk Attack Gun is eye-catchingly bizarre, my precious Runtbot is a hero...
I'm hoping someday I'll get a middle ground between the two ranges. Long shot I know, but dreams are free

sigur
22-03-2006, 12:37
I'm a big fan of GW's older miniatures, also because of the "character thing" and because it reminds me of a time when GW wasn't a constant nuisance. I'm also not particularly happy with the direction the miniature design is taking. If I look at a Valhallan and at a Vostroyan, I definitly know where my heart is. Somehow, new miniatures don't give me the same feeling the old ones (1990-1997) do. The last time I was enthusiastic about a miniature was when the plastic cadians were released, but now I probably like them less than any other regiment. Of course, there's also a healthy dose of nostalgia in all that, but even apart from that, I believe that the good old days were actually good.

Odin
22-03-2006, 13:59
My old lead chaos dragon has sagged under his own weight and looks like he's having a nap. :(

Kodamas
22-03-2006, 14:32
[looks to corner of room as his vision goes fuzzy...]

For me it is a nostalgia thing. My first minis were the old 5th edition Lizzies that I got cheap when I started at the begining of 6th edition. I think that this is why I love the old Lizard models so much. The old temple guard were great IMHO. The old skinks a bit crappy now but I still remember painting one glossy red and implementing it was better than most because fo this [/end fuzzy flashback]

I think this is the main reason people collect and still love old minis...

Echos

Osbad
22-03-2006, 15:01
I've gotta agree.

To me, these: http://www.osbad.freeservers.com/photo5.html have much more character than these: http://uk.games-workshop.com/orcsandgoblins/miniature-gallery/7/

It's purely personal as any aesthetic judgment always is, but "newer" just doesn't always mean "better". Quite often it means "worse". When that gets combined with "more expensive" then the whole upgrade thing just falls apart for me...

Pokpoko
22-03-2006, 15:27
Kodomas-well, i have to disagree-except for three minis(Kroxigor,Slann and saurus inf.but only due to ****** head design)the entire new range is superior to the old ones-far more detailed,and reptile looking.the old saurus looked like orks with serpent heads. don't even get me started on the damn weapons-i'm so glad they dropped the "stone age" looks it's impossible to put to words.
as for the character-i'm sorry, i don't buy it. i'v seen some nice old minis, i have no problem with them(the different style dwarves are one of such).but caliming that a butt-ugly mini is superior only beacuse it's older is just unreasonable.

RGB
22-03-2006, 15:48
Which is why I hate what they're doing with the plastics. Customising and converting are the strength of plastics, and removing the option for easy conversion is counter-productive in my eyes.


Oh I agree. I want sprues with lots of bits, monopose is not what plastic is meant to be about. So I'm happy with the ones right NOW, but I'd be less than thrilled if they went all monopose.

Trench_Raider
22-03-2006, 17:15
isn't lead dangerous?

Coming out of the barrel of a gun it can be pretty dangerous! :D

But seriously, that was the question being asked by the (mostly politically motivated) fear-mongers back in the early '90s during the "lead scare" that caused the shift away from lead in the first place.

The answer is no, not if you take some common sense precautions. Don't chew or eat your figures. Only file or trip them in well venilated areas. Don't eat, drink, or smoke while handling them unprimed and wash your hands after doing so. Once the figure is covered in primer the (admitedly small in the first place) risk goes away. When used in their proper intended way lead wargame figures pose no risk to the consumer. This was the finding of the NY state legislature panel that investigated the "problem".

Then and now the risk associated with lead figures is minimal to the point of being non-existant.

"Trench Raider"
Who thinks you should all stay away from old lead miniatures anyway so there is less competition when i bid for them on ebay!! :D

Commissar von Toussaint
22-03-2006, 18:08
Obviously, as someone who continues to play 2nd ed. 40k, I have a great Fondness for the older models.

When people talk about character, I think they mean a couple of things.

To me, it symbolizes the old mentality of GW: putting the game and fun before profit.

Back then, GW didn't take itself so seriously. The models had a sense of humor and the system was designed for players to tinker with it. Conversions - open-ended conversions, using whatever was handy - was encouraged and supported. Hell, in some cases you had to because GW never got around to making the model at all!

The game system matched those models perfectly: sometimes clunky, sometimes silly, but always a hoot. That's why we still play it.

My gaming group continues to add new players and many of them have joined my in digging out old models and making new conversions for OOP stuff.

I also want to point out that these "clunky" old models are what built GW. For all the warts and problems, GW really took off because of that old stuff that newbies (and GW itself) now scoff at.

For all the techincal superiority and cleaner lines of the newer models and books, they have a lot less heart and public interest is waning.

Yeah, there's some nostalgia I suppose, but most of my group never played 40k until now. They've looked at what is out there now and what GW used to produce and they simply like the older stuff better.

Crazy Harborc
22-03-2006, 20:20
Lead poisoning means for the rest of your life you WILL be forced to NOT touch lead minies, paint with lead in it, other products with lead in them, ALL of it just may kill you.

I know a man who HAS been there. He HAD a vast collection of lead minies. He was making/creating new minies. He was/is a very talented craftsman. He inhaled more fumes than he thought, darn near died. He WAS poisoned, lead poisoning from his minies, tha paint and from the fumes present during molding.

Wash........your hands, lots of soap, rinse VERY well too, after handling unpainted OR painted minies that contain lead.

Trench_Raider
22-03-2006, 20:36
That is the first time I have ever heard of anyone who showed signs of lead poisoning that could be conclusively traced to wargame miniatures. The NY legislature was unable to uncover an example of such back in the '90s. The best they could produce was the children at question in the civil case that caused the lead scare in the first place. Two kids at the center of a divorce showed elivated levels of lead and their father owned a couple of D&D figures which the mother claimed were the cause of the problem. Turns out that their light poisoning was caused by increased levels of lead in their drinking water inflicted by run-off from a nearby gun range.

I'm not saying that it is impossible, but that such cases are extremely rare, are only problable in the case of very heavy exposure such as noted in Harboc's example, and what risk there is can be eliminated by common sense precautions.

"Trench Raider"

Some guy (UK)
22-03-2006, 20:59
Sorry to hear that Crazy Harboc. Who could have thought little metal men could be so potentially dangerous, taking you without you knowing it.

Later, Some Guy (UK)

RevEv
22-03-2006, 21:41
Lead is very nasty - and considering that the old folk in the hobby (like me) have little ones going around touching 'Daddy's models' I wouldn't have been as keen as I am on the models if they were still made of lead.

On topic, however, I have to agree that the old models had a great deal of humour, even if they were a little lacking in their modelling prowess. Just have a closer look at the old style Ork Kommandos - they have swiss army knives.

Commissar von Toussaint
23-03-2006, 01:02
Lead poisoning means for the rest of your life you WILL be forced to NOT touch lead minies, paint with lead in it, other products with lead in them, ALL of it just may kill you.

I know a man who HAS been there. He HAD a vast collection of lead minies. He was making/creating new minies. He was/is a very talented craftsman. He inhaled more fumes than he thought, darn near died. He WAS poisoned, lead poisoning from his minies, tha paint and from the fumes present during molding.

Wash........your hands, lots of soap, rinse VERY well too, after handling unpainted OR painted minies that contain lead.

Just curious - how do they know it was the models?

Two years ago the Board of Water and Light revealed that it had known for 10 years that about 10,000 residences had lead water pipes.

These were older houses in older neighborhoods. It wasn't picked up at first because the water leaving the city wells was clean and nobody bothered much about the tap. Not sure how they discovered it, but they tried to keep it quiet while the pipes were slowly replaced.

The Big Plan was to replace the lines along with the sewer separation and street repaving project. The initial line was that if you just ran your tap for a minute or two, no problem.

At least that was what they told everybody. After they went public, other scientists got involved and basically the city ended up giving high-speed water filters for everyone with a lead line because the danger was actually pretty serious. Our house was put on a priority list because we had children under 3 so a work crew came by last fall and put the new line in.

My point is that thousands of people had serious lead exposure for about 70 years and no one knew about it.

That seems a heck of a lot more credible than rubbing one's moistened hands over lead figures oh so affectionately.

Just sayin'.

Trench_Raider
23-03-2006, 01:58
that was the point I was trying to make when pointing out the example of the kids in the NY divorce case. There are other sources of lead contamination and I have never heard of an example of someone who was poisoned by wargaming figures. And recall that I've been wargaming since the early '80s.

Commons sense precautions should be taken any time you handle lead. I know a guy who owns a spin casting machine. I've helped him do some casting from time to time and we always make a point of wearing gas masks when doing the actual melting. I know others who are black power gun enthusiasts who cast their own bullets. They also wear masks.

I'm not saying Harboc is wrong, but if he is correct, that is the first time I have heard of such a case.

"Trench Raider"

Emperor's Grace
23-03-2006, 02:56
He was making/creating new minies. ... He inhaled more fumes than he thought, darn near died. He WAS poisoned, lead poisoning from his minies, tha paint and from the fumes present during molding.

Wash........your hands, lots of soap, rinse VERY well too, after handling unpainted OR painted minies that contain lead.

I find it more likely that the fumes (from the smelting) were the cause - not handling the mini's.

Also possibly residue on adjoining surfaces in a poorly ventilated space.

Most western countries banned lead based paint (US in the 70's).

Handling unpainted mini's (without mouth transfer) will not result in a significant transfer of lead to blood levels. With paint/sealant and proper handling? Almost no danger.

Remember that artists have used lead paints for thousands of years. Most poisoning cases are linked to ingestion and or inhalation.

That's why they warn kids not to eat lead paint chips but don't warn them not to touch unknown walls.

Emperor's Grace
23-03-2006, 03:10
Two years ago the Board of Water and Light revealed that it had known for 10 years that about 10,000 residences had lead water pipes.

...

The initial line was that if you just ran your tap for a minute or two, no problem.



Lead pipes are not uncommon in older plumbing. It was actually prized in colder climes for it's ability to "flex" with the ground instead of breaking during season changes. Molten lead joints are a wonder. Cast iron stacks are sealed with lead and oakum. Etc...

As far as the minute or two, they are correct - for the most part.

Water (particularly hard water) tends to oxidize the interior of the pipe and "seal off" the lead. Really it just slows the absorption/exchange. Water that flows rapidly in old undamaged pipes does not have the time to pick up a significant amount of lead. By running off the standing water, you reduce your risk significantly.

Now the caveats... Your risk level is extreme at young ages (neural development) and when construction/damage disturbs the oxidation layer exposing more lead. It sounds like your family faced both. (Note that these are RISK factors and not necessarily a guarantee of high blood levels)

Mad Makz
23-03-2006, 05:15
One big aspect of the metal miniatures of the old days is they made a heap load more variants. Today, you get maybe 3-6 (at most) metal variants. In the old days a single model range could have 6-18 different metal models made for it and available for use. This led to the odd really fantastic individual unit model, one that you couldn't really achieve as a conversion with sculpting heavily from scratch.

Those who dislike uniformity in all it's forms and are heavily towards individuality are obviously going to prefer the individually sculpted model, as they tended towards being their own little character.

Newer models (especially the plastics) require more interchangeability and if you are a less competent converter/sculpter then you are likely to get less 'heavily' individualised models, because you will put them together more or less the same way without fiddling around for ages getting them each unique, and those who like individualism but not heavy conversion would have rather just brought them unique in the first place, and painted them to make them even more individualised.

Half Eldar
23-03-2006, 05:21
I have to say I generally come down on the side of new and plastic. I find plastic glue much more stable, and I can drop plastic minis and nought happens. I can hack chop and melt plastic more easily.

That said, all I ask from my opponent is some good fun. Be a jerk, and I don't care how much 'character' your figs ooze or how much crisp shiny newness they possess, fun times don't ensue. I am fully capable of asking what models are if I forget an initial explanation of counts as.

RGB: I buy your point that character isn't a logical argument, but I'd point out its irrelevant. At the end of the day, it comes down to aesthetics. Price for me is the kicker. I don't expect anyone to go spend money to replace models - heck, I'm largely happy playing with chits if I've got a good person across the table.

Trench: I have to say, I can't stand those old Chaos Warriors. ;) But of course you're absolutely welcome to them. I have to ask however, isn't refusing to play someone under 18 just as childish as refusing to play someone who doesn't spend $500/year on the latest and greatest? Perhaps more so since the former involves no choice at all. I take that sort of thing vaguely personally, as some years ago one of my best games was against this quiet 40 year old who deigned to play with a young whippersnapper - I really think that having older folks who're nice will convince younger folks not to be jerks, and playing with younger folks will teach older folks some more patience - it's a win-win situation.

Now, of course, if you're just meaning a general statement reflecting that your store is perhaps filled with all the That Guys that aren't where I am, then that's one thing.

Half Eldar
23-03-2006, 05:23
One big aspect of the metal miniatures of the old days is they made a heap load more variants. Today, you get maybe 3-6 (at most) metal variants. In the old days a single model range could have 6-18 different metal models made for it and available for use. This led to the odd really fantastic individual unit model, one that you couldn't really achieve as a conversion with sculpting heavily from scratch.

Those who dislike uniformity in all it's forms and are heavily towards individuality are obviously going to prefer the individually sculpted model, as they tended towards being their own little character.

Newer models (especially the plastics) require more interchangeability and if you are a less competent converter/sculpter then you are likely to get less 'heavily' individualised models, because you will put them together more or less the same way without fiddling around for ages getting them each unique, and those who like individualism but not heavy conversion would have rather just brought them unique in the first place, and painted them to make them even more individualised.

See for me the assembly and conversions are from where the individuality springs from. I tend to go to great lengths ensuring that every multi part plastic is made from a different combination of parts, and then start hacking it up with more stuff and bit and bobs. But I certainly see your point for people who enjoy painting.

Jellicoe
23-03-2006, 10:07
Osbad

those are the ones! - Chronicle ogres and Chronicle wolf riders, fantastic stuff, yours are much better painted though than my pre teen humbrol daubs, I'd best go find my paint stripper

Dr Death
23-03-2006, 10:37
Yes, it i remarkable the variety the old metal models had. Nowadays the fairly meagre offerings of around 4 metal models for any new range of a given regiment look humble next to the ranges of say 16 (20 in the case of the questing knights) models of old. When you think how slow GW are at releasing ranges recently (2, maybe 3 a year for warhammer and 40k), why arnt we getting the same numbers for our waiting?

Another problem with the new metal ranges is they all seem to be remarkably single posed, with only the details differing. You get maybe one or two different poses. This i think is something GW have to remedy- more exciting metal rankers.

But over all i do prefer many old ranges, partly nostalgia, partly aesthetic. They hark back to a far less comercial time and it shows.

Dr Death

Mad Doc Grotsnik
23-03-2006, 10:50
Why is it that a lot of gamers want to use old mini's that are not made anymore and dont have any stats for the new system? So they take a mini they may have liked and try to fit it to something close to what it was. It no longer exisists in the game play so why use it? I see this floating about in forums all the time, but I just dont understand. I mean if it was a good model and still had stats in the new system of play, say a space marine, then yay I could see it being used. But why try to resurrect something from the dead?

Why not? The models fondest to me are the original Metal Terminators. I can still remember the first White Dwarf I ever read.

Likewise, the original Epic models will always be special to me, as thats the first game I properly played. I mean, I started on Adeptus Titanicus (still have it, and Codex Titanicus too! Woot!).

The only reason I use newer models is that they are for new armies. Like my Dark Elves. Not a single old model in there. Why? I only bought them 2 years ago! But then, Cade and I have a whole Company of Dark Angels consisting of the old plastic scouts, and 2nd Edition Marines. Why shouldn't I keep on using them?

Granted, I will eventually be replacing some of my older models, most notably Epic, but this isn't for any Marketing reason, so much as I don't want to break what are essentially relics of my childhood!

*EDIT*

to put to rest the Lead Debate...GW moved over to White Metal because the EU were looking at tabling a resolution about Lead in toys. Although it never actually came about, by that time GW had already completed the transfer. So there you go!

Osbad
23-03-2006, 10:52
Glad you like 'em Jellicoe!

This thread piqued me and I took a look at the old Warhammer stuff that is gathering dust in boxes. What I saw prompted me to come back on here.

I had forgotten just how immense the "scale creep" had got. Look at Orcs in particular. Nowadays a "rank and file" Orc is the size of an old-style Ogre. Ogres are now Giant-sized and Giants are .... well bloomin' massive.

I guess a lot of people like this increase in size or Gee-dub wouldn't have gone down that route. Me personally I preferred the old sizes! It wasn't exactly "true 25mm" even then, but nowadays I see games being played with models that are almost the size of the 1/32 scale "Britains" toy soldiers.

Just thought I'd mention it as it doesn't seem to have been raised before.

spevna
23-03-2006, 13:15
My favourite part of the online GW catalogue has to be the collectors/classics section as they still have a lot of those lovely old Chaos warriors.

If you are looking for a nice alternative to squats you should check out

http://olleysarmies.co.uk/

He is one of the guys to sculpt the original squats and has a nice lot of them at decent prices. Black tree also do some nice space dwarves.

While there were some truely lovely old metal minis there were also a fair share of not so good minis that came out at the same time. As much as I like the beakies it has to be said that the very first plastic box set was rather lacking in detail.

So while we have lost a lot of character in our metal figs I think we have been spoilt by the amount of detail and improvement in the quality of plastic models.

Jellicoe
23-03-2006, 19:42
I had forgotten just how immense the "scale creep" had got. Look at Orcs in particular. Nowadays a "rank and file" Orc is the size of an old-style Ogre. Ogres are now Giant-sized and Giants are .... well bloomin' massive

Absolutely, an old chronicle orc is about the size of a modern day goblin and the then black orc range is now the equivalent of a rather malnourished Orc

just as well you had to stick the old lead based stuff on plastic bases, at the very least it gives them a bit of extra height!

There was definitely more variety in the metal figs then, just take a gander at the very earliest Citadel Journals, pages and pages and pages of metal minatures in a multitude of poses and even then not all were in there.

Current plastics do have some advantages in terms of easy to pose etc for the minimally skilled converter such as myself but the old figs do it for me, largely on the totally subjective view of heft and nostalgia

Griefbringer
24-03-2006, 13:27
For the observant, grab a hold of the UK WD316 (latest issue) and take a look at the Mordheim pages in the end: look for the page with hired sword piccies (rather Ogre-dominated for some reason), on the bottom you can see a really classic fighter model from around 1987 - I was really surprised that it was included. Nice model it is though - I think I have one of those somewhere.

greenskinned git
24-03-2006, 14:04
My current Ork Kult of Speed army, has a wide mixture of models from all the era's - modern plastics, gorkamorka vehicles (obviously..) second edition plastic goffs, and some nobs, and a few Rogue trader boys mixed in for colour. I tend to get many more positive comments on the old guys than on the new, and of course, in tournaments, I have some models that are older than the opposing general. That tends to be cool for a little psyche out edge!

On the other hand, the new plastics are great for customizing, I have made some power claws out of a mix of knives, and some chain choppas, and it would be pretty much a non starter if they were metal. If a plastic model slips off a table, it's a quick fix, compared to the virtual hand grenade that goes off, if my shokkattack gun model slips off the table. This has happened more than once, I'll tell you. I too love the heft of my old metal guys, but there are equally times that repairs are extremely frustrating.

It's cool when I can tell stories of old "Lucky the grot" who has been with me since the beginning. My usual opponent will go out of his way to try and take him out, to the point of damaging his battle plan.

Opus T. Penguin
25-03-2006, 08:15
I have some models that are older than the opposing general.

I've got two fantasy armies (Dwarves, Slann) that that are legally old enough to drink here in the states (21+ years old -- or at least some of the pieces in them are). I also have some assorted non-slotta greenskins who could possibly be organized into an army too.

And I have to say, the end of the non-slotta era at GW produced some gorgeous minis. It took them a couple of years to get the slotta minis back up to that standard.

Flame Boy
26-03-2006, 00:01
To be honest, I can't stand the old RT marines, the Imperial Fist earlier looked more like a diminutive ogryn with that awkward pose and lumpy head. I've been looking for some unique parts for my conversions, but I just can't stomach the RT minis. The Chaos warriors, sure, I like them, but they have an excuse to look different from each other and to look slghtly deformed. It's a Mark of Chaos.

I find looking through the older catalogues are a very hit-and-miss affair. One of those Chaos warriors looks like a nice Adeptus Mechanicus Magos in the works, but I find older marines clumsy and awkward rather than characterful.

One of the other reasons for my decision is that I despite metal models. I have far too many memories for cumbersome, clunky models, inch-thick, bendy swords.

One thing you can say about plastic models. Even if someone jogs the table and they fly halfway across the room, they won't have a scratch on them. Metal models flake paint if you look at them too hard. I never managed to get enough coats of varnish on my models to stop them chipping. I'm guessing the ration was 1 can per model or something, or you painted on gloss varnish and tried to explain why your model looked like it was covered in three inches of slime.

Saying that, I hated the old Tyranid Screamer Killer when I first saw it, but it's really grown on me over time. I think its the expressive eyes... You don't get the same spiteful expression in the modern Carnifex, even with it's intricately detailed head.

emperorattack
26-03-2006, 02:43
Ummmm... its the same thing as people collecting antiques... they might be quite gruesome and poor quality but they are a part of history.
EXACTLY!!!!!:)

Mad Doc Grotsnik
26-03-2006, 08:45
And as an addendum to my earlier post, where, for those who cannot be arsed to go back and read it, I was in support of using older models....

I find it *highly* pretentious when people deliberately seek out the older sculpts in order to gain some kind of bizarre 'Historical Kudos' from their fellow gamers, who, 99.9% of the time don't really give a hoot as long as they can tell, at a glance, whats what.

That, and most of the earlier models are, quite frankly, somewhat rubbish. Especially the Marines.

Keravin
26-03-2006, 18:46
If you're using Space Marines past the pre slotta versions you're not using the real historical marines :)

ArtificerArmour
26-03-2006, 19:01
I've begun a tallarn army and noticed they seem much nicer quality than the valhallans.

Are they "younger" - i thought they were made at the same time.

simonr1978
26-03-2006, 19:08
If you're using Space Marines past the pre slotta versions you're not using the real historical marines :)


You're talking about a science fiction game of toy soldiers in which the fictional background is extremely fluid and subject to change at a moment's notice, "Real" and "Historical" just aren't even remotely appropriate words.

sigur
26-03-2006, 20:11
@Artificier Armour: They are made about the same time. Sadly, I never had the oportunity to compare Tallarns and Valhallans directly. I do own a Valhallan army, but never had any of the minis at hand when I inspected single Tallarn miniatures. From the pictures, I never saw a big difference between the miniatures but now that you mention it, I believe that the Catachans are also a bit more detailed than the Valhallans. Their look might by a bit more crude intentionally (the "big-teethed" chainswords and the strange muzzle on Valhallan Sgt. #1 for example).

You might have looked at the heavy and special weapons guys (in the tallarn case: missile launcher, mortar, ... if I remember correctly) who were released ~4 years after the rest of the miniatures though and they might be a wee bit more detailed. In any case, I like them good old metal guardsmen.:) Actually, writing this post makes me want to repaint those good old Valhallans and finally field them after having bought the army some years ago.


@simonr1978: Everything has it's history and if you're interested in it it can be really entertaining to explore it. Apart from that, I believe that he was just kidding, so no reason for hard feelings.:)

@Mad Doc Grotsnik: Good to see you and your controversial opinions around here.;)

Trench_Raider
26-03-2006, 20:43
Doc-


those who cannot be arsed to go back and read it, I was in support of using older models....


That's good to hear as your masters in Notingham are very much against it.


I find it *highly* pretentious when people deliberately seek out the older sculpts in order to gain some kind of bizarre 'Historical Kudos' from their fellow gamers,

Admittedly, that would be a bit odd. However I yet to encounter anyone who was seeking out old sculpts for their army that was primarily motivated by a desire to look "cool" in the eyes of fellow gamers. I'm not going to say it NEVER happens, but it is clearly not a common thing.


99.9% of the time don't really give a hoot as long as they can tell, at a glance, whats what.


This has not been my experience.
I find that with some exceptions (mostly the young kids who continuously play with unpainted miniatures and really don't care about the look of the game) most players are keenly aware of what figures their opponents are using and what they look like. This is even more the case in a tournement were part of the scoring system requires you to look at your opponent's army to rank it on painting and comp. It has been my experience that using unusual models will quite often prompt a second look from other players and usually a favorable opinion. I'm not a great painter (my style being geared toward finishing large numbers at high speed and being designed to be viewed at gaming distances when in units rather than invidual examination) but my armies always cause quite a stir and get alot of complements when I show up at a in-store game or tourny.
Clearly your comment that 99.9% of all gamers don;t care what your figures look like is a gross exageration.


That, and most of the earlier models are, quite frankly, somewhat rubbish. Especially the Marines.

I'll say the same thing I do in the various "the Squats sucked" threads. You can't view the older minitaures in a vacume. You have to take them in context. Look at miniatures from other companies at the time in which the earlier sculpts apeared (from the big name companies like Ral Partha, RAFM, and Grenadier if we are talking about the '80s here) and compare the Citadel stuff to them. When viewed in the proper context, the "mostly rubish" comment falls apart rather quickly.

"Trench Raider"

simonr1978
26-03-2006, 20:54
Sigur.

No hard feelings at all, just pointing out that even though everything may have it's History in this case equipment even entire races or any other aspect you care to consider can be altered, written into the background or written out of it. All the while this occurs without advancing the timeline, it makes the concept of what is or isn't "Real" even within such fluid boundaries impossible to define.

I was interested in the Story and History, then it went unaccountably Gothic and huge aspects of it suddenly changed. The idea that there is a "history" to the Wh40K universe is simply untrue, beyond a vague framework it can all be changed at a whim, as has happened before.

A Space Marine figure is a Space Marine figure, doesn't matter if it predates Slotta bases or not, it's as "Real" and "Historical" as the RT era ones, as the 2nd Ed plug-in-weapon ones or as the current examples.

Griefbringer
27-03-2006, 08:07
I've begun a tallarn army and noticed they seem much nicer quality than the valhallans.

Are they "younger" - i thought they were made at the same time.

They were released at the same time (a couple of months of difference, though there could have been a bit more difference in sculpting).

However, they are not by the same sculptor: Valhallans are by Alan Perry, Tallarns by Michael Perry. Their sculpting styles are very similar, though.

Taliesynkp
27-03-2006, 15:17
You're talking about a science fiction game of toy soldiers in which the fictional background is extremely fluid and subject to change at a moment's notice, "Real" and "Historical" just aren't even remotely appropriate words.

You may accept GW's, "We're gonna change anything we want whenever we want." nonsense but many of us do not. My RT era books are still THE source for all info. Anything that contradicts them is hearsay and propaganda. Old fluff always trumps new fluff. If you don't live by the Fluff Trump Rule then you'll neve be a grognard.


I suppose that when GW writes a unit out of the game you put it on the shelf and don't use it anymore?

simonr1978
27-03-2006, 15:53
Talies, you have me completely wrong. I loathe the current way an accepted race or troop type can suddenly have been utterly wiped out without trace (Or even just not exist at all, whatever happened to Whiteshields or Beastman attack squads? Were they all eaten by 'nids too?) and new races can suddenly appear to have been there for ages.

I was just trying to point out that you can't start bandying around words or phrases like Real historical Marines, because a) They're Science Fiction toy soldiers, they aren't real, b) Whatever is accepted as "Real Historical" figure, race or item of equipment today can be changed tommorrow by the designers.

I agree with you, the RT era books contain the original fluff, if anything is to be considered the "real" Fluff to me it's them, ah for the days when tactical Marines carried a Bolter, bolt pistol, knife and grenades that actually meant something... ;)

Mad Doc Grotsnik
27-03-2006, 18:15
Trench.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying when I said about the 99.9% thing.

I wasn't refering to painting ability at all, or indeed, sculpting quality, but to the ability to tell whats a Marine, whose armed with a Missile Launcher, and whether or not that character does indeed have a Powerfist.

I have met one buttplug who claimed he would only play against people whose armies contained up to date models.

And I don't work for GW dammit! Haven't done for...ummm....around 18 months. Still wish I did though. The discount was good!


I suppose that when GW writes a unit out of the game you put it on the shelf and don't use it anymore?

You know, I've heard this bandied around an awful lot, and I really cannot think of *that* many units which have been dropped from the game. Granted, you have the Squats, but how many other units have actually been dropped? In Warhammer, I can't actually think of any, at least, none which haven't turned up as DoW choices (Imperial Dwarves Ogres and Halflings etc.)

Name me.....5 units that have been dropped in the past 5 years.

Trench_Raider
27-03-2006, 18:51
Doc-


I wasn't refering to painting ability at all, or indeed, sculpting quality, but to the ability to tell whats a Marine, whose armed with a Missile Launcher, and whether or not that character does indeed have a Powerfist.


I see.
But I still contend that most players DO care which models are being used.


And I don't work for GW dammit! Haven't done for...ummm....around 18 months.

At first i was thinking about amending my post to say "former masters in Nottingham" but thought better of it. As you seem to buy into just about everything thay say/do it still applies. :D


have met one buttplug who claimed he would only play against people whose armies contained up to date models.


In other words, GW's kind of player! :rolleyes:
Hopefully he was hooted out of your club.


Name me.....5 units that have been dropped in the past 5 years.

Well, when you place an unreasonable qualifer like "5 years" of your request it makes it alot harder. Expand it to "10 years" and I can name three times that.
But I'll think about it and see what I come up with.

"Trench Raider"

Edit:
I have no idea how I missed this quote by Fame Boy-

One thing you can say about plastic models. Even if someone jogs the table and they fly halfway across the room, they won't have a scratch on them. Metal models flake paint if you look at them too hard. I never managed to get enough coats of varnish on my models to stop them chipping. I'm guessing the ration was 1 can per model or something,

This is simply not true.
I use gloss polyurethane on pretty much everything I paint and the stuff simply does not chip. Many people I know use the much tougher gloss finish and then apply a coat of matte over that to kill the shine. I just leave it shiny as I like the way the gloss brightens colors.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
27-03-2006, 18:57
I told him that as I had been playing for (at that time) 14 years, he should expect my Space Marine army to not be 100% up to date. And if he didn't like it, play someone else.

He chose the latter, only to find everyone else had much the same!

Tell you what, expand it to....7 years. I'll meet you in the middle.

Trench_Raider
27-03-2006, 19:06
Good for you. Seriously. I'm glad to hear that.
I'm normally a very "laid back" opponent who gets very high marks for sportsmanship. But I would have been sorely tempted to be very rude to a clown like that.


Tell you what, expand it to....7 years. I'll meet you in the middle.

Not good enough. 1999 is still too late. That would be after the introduction of 3rd ed. 40k (were the real changes in that system started...game mechanics aside there was not much of a change in 40k from 3rd to 4th) and (I think but am not sure) 6th ed. WFB. Push your cut off to before the advent of both of those systems and I've got your challenge answered.

"Trench Raider"

Hashut's Li'l Helper
27-03-2006, 23:31
Ungor skirmishers with ungor command
fiends of slanneesh
Forest goblins and spider riders (although they are coming back)
skeletons with great weapons
Mummies
Assorted special characters and almost all monsters
demonic cav is certainly on the block

I don't really play 40k but I think these
Harlequins?
Are there still roughriders?
orc or tyranid squigs?
genestealer cultists?

Crazy Harborc
28-03-2006, 02:19
I actually had an opponent try to tell me I couldn't use a unit because the minies were the wrong ones (old versions). This guy was an adult :wtf: at least in age.

I just smiled and said okay...........NEXT, anybody here to play and have FUN?. He gave up and left, nobody else would play him. Found out he was banned at a couple of indie stores. Not just no use of the tables banned, but stay OUT period.

MIGHTYPanhead
28-03-2006, 03:30
One thing you can say about plastic models. Even if someone jogs the table and they fly halfway across the room, they won't have a scratch on them. Metal models flake paint if you look at them too hard. I never managed to get enough coats of varnish on my models to stop them chipping. I'm guessing the ration was 1 can per model or something,



:eyebrows:

You're faith in plastics is misplaced. Half-way across the room = one model broken at joints not supposed to be broken. Metal on the other hand, just doesn't break like that.

though I may only use my own opinion to go by, metal is superior to plastic in durability. Paint doesn't stick to it as easily, but with the gloss/matt combo it doesn't really matter. Some of my inkwashed things don't even need varnish to survive 4-5 foot falls without scratches.

Some guy (UK)
28-03-2006, 10:11
Actually, it depends on the model. For example, a multi part metal, suh as the original metal gave trool for LOTR SBG breaks easily if knocked off a table, where as a standard rank and file metal figure of normal size will most likely just be bent.

If it is a plastic mini with loads of thin weak things sticking out of it, they will snap, but if it is a small plastic mini with no major sticky out parts, most cases it won't break.

Later, Some Guy (UK)

boogle
28-03-2006, 10:38
well i've used my long OOP Commissar in my Elysian Army with no mention of it at all (it;s the Sword and Power fist one), thereason why i use it, is it's actually in perfect scale with the Elysians (as is the Female Commissar), i will be getting some more OOP Commissars hopefully next week to add to my force

Delicious Soy
28-03-2006, 12:25
Not good enough. 1999 is still too late. That would be after the introduction of 3rd ed. 40k (were the real changes in that system started...game mechanics aside there was not much of a change in 40k from 3rd to 4th) and (I think but am not sure) 6th ed. WFB. Push your cut off to before the advent of both of those systems and I've got your challenge answered.THings that didn't survive in one form or the other from 2nd ed from the current armies seem to me as follows:

IG:

- Valhallan Sergeant w/Hand Flamer
- Commissar w/Hand Flamer

SM:

- Several Combos of assault marine due to the old assault sprue
- Vt Sgt w/aux Gren Launcher
- A few old Death Company, again due to the CCW sprue

Eldar:

- Guardian w/lasguns (probably the biggest thing I can think of)
- Again Guardian models that use the power sword or fist from the eldar weapon sprue
- Two Guardian models with PW/Shuriken Pistols and one Guardian w/Laspistol and PW
- Eldar Scout w/PW and Shuriken Pistol, Eldar Scout w/laspistols
- Dark Reaper Exarch w/web of skulls (IIRC a stupid model even at the time)
- D-Cannon on Wraithlord
- Harlequin w/Handflamer

Tyranids:

- Tyranid Warrior w/lash whip and bonesword
- Warrior with Bonesword and spinefist

Orks:

- WEapons of the Ork Bolta Sprue (which could plausibly be redefined and modern ork weapons)
- Poss Bad Moons in Mega Armour
- Flashgit with power weapon and kustom Weapon
- Snotlings?
- Laskannon, and Multimetla 'eavy weapons (the eav'y stubba, Auto Kannon and 'eavy Bolta to me would be obvious big shootas)
- Shokk Attack Gun
- Laskannon on Ork Dreadnought
- Smasha gun
- Pulsa Rokkit

Chaos:

Nothing

That is of course, from the 1997 annual so I'm interested as to what else is on the list. Aside from the Eldar move to all shuriken catapults, it's more a case of weapon options caused largely by GW's effor to increase differntiation between the races (surely a noble goal? Even if there is some underhanded profiterring conspiracy behind it). This is especially problematic with the SM because its more of a case of GW having a weapon sprue with one of each weapon (slightly balanced if it was one per blister, I can't remeber back that far as my first army [Eldar] was embyroinc before the advent of 3rd ed). Of course an interesting thing in 4th ed is that we are seeing a return of many old elements, mainly because I think 3rd ed definitely cost alot of character and flavour through something of an overkill in its purge of the system so it seems from my perusal of the annual that more things had come back into the game after a period of abscence, but we'll see whats what after the new Eldar and Orks Codicies are released.

Mooncow
28-03-2006, 14:50
It doesnt seem to be a whole lot of minis that have been made obsolete, and many of those that are could easily be proxied-eg lasguns for shuriken catapults.

most of the ones that have gone completely were one offs (like shock attack gun) or a bit of a unusual unit (demon cavalry) and even the demonic cav or shock attack could just be some chqaos knights or big shoota...
I really dont think that GW goes out of its way to screw people over. sure I bawk at the prices these days, but Im an adult and have a job. If I go out and have a few beers I gladly pay the price I would pay for a boxed set or few blisters. face facts-things are more expensive these days. I wish a can of coke was still 30p!

Its a common thing with everything. so if you want to keep using your old figures thats fine. few places ban them outright. the opponent will usually be able to see what they are and wont mind.
I do think a lot of older figures are crappy though...sure they have nostalgea, but...they do look bad. character does not = humour...

It just seems to me a lot of people complaining have some kind of inferiority complex, or wish the game had never changed since 1st ed! You can still play 1st ed fine, no GW police will bash down your door. play what you like!

whats with the obsession over tournaments these days!

Mooncow
28-03-2006, 14:52
and I mean seriously...how many people actually played squats anyways...:D

Ivan Stupidor
28-03-2006, 14:55
well i've used my long OOP Commissar in my Elysian Army with no mention of it at all (it;s the Sword and Power fist one), thereason why i use it, is it's actually in perfect scale with the Elysians (as is the Female Commissar), i will be getting some more OOP Commissars hopefully next week to add to my force

I don't think Commissar with Sword and Power Fist is OOP; I picked one up a few months ago (if I'm thinking of the same one you are - the one on the right (http://ca.games-workshop.com/storefront/newimage.asp?Size=A&Img=6325)).

Ifurita
28-03-2006, 14:59
My chaos dwarves with all of their associated warmachines (CD bazooka, CD petard, tenderizer and whirlwind) are gathering dust. No more goblin lead belcher :(, no more Dwarf goblobber

But these are also beyond your time frame ;)

Mooncow
28-03-2006, 15:25
Ive been playing for 15 years...I know the goblin leadbelcher, and the chaos dwarf stuff.

did your army consist of 15 goblin leadbelchers. at the time did you honestly think the big hatted chaos dwarves looked anything more than a joke?(some people have an affection for them, but apart from the taurus they looked rediculous in my POV) the boar centaur tenderiser pushed wagon thing was great...but I didnt hear any one complaining when 4th ed WFB made that RIP
the thing is...this thing has been happening for a long time, and save for a few armies (chaos dwarf are still playable, squats are...well...dead, but were they ever more than a fringe army-I am expecting the rants from obsesive squat players with 10,000 points of trikes, hearthguard and exoarmoured rugby balls)

what ever happened to the nippon kamakaze squads! or slann lobotomised slaves! or hobhounds!damnit GW for phasing out these popular and essential units!

Ive just collected a witchhunters 40k army...and I have to say anyone who can argue the quality of these models to those from 10+ years ago is just not facing facts! sure it would have been cheaper if Id bought my figures 15 years ago...but they wouldnt be as good.

the hobby has moved on. doesnt stop me playing the odd game of talisman, but I can say the models arnt so good.

Mooncow
28-03-2006, 15:31
correct me if Im wrong, but unless all 1st ed books burned up suddenly with an insidious time delay chemical inplemented by GW`25 odd years ago, there is absolutly nothing stopping you using them and the old figures to play your games.

but if you look at the appearance of a game these days on a nice board and modern figs, and a game from the past...which looks honestly better. honestly...

things have moved on...I wish I could still enjoy a game of galaxian on my old amstrad...but...well, after 2 minutes of nostalgea I think...this is crap-I cant play it!

RGB
28-03-2006, 15:55
:eyebrows:

You're faith in plastics is misplaced. Half-way across the room = one model broken at joints not supposed to be broken. Metal on the other hand, just doesn't break like that.

though I may only use my own opinion to go by, metal is superior to plastic in durability. Paint doesn't stick to it as easily, but with the gloss/matt combo it doesn't really matter. Some of my inkwashed things don't even need varnish to survive 4-5 foot falls without scratches.

Well, first of all I didn't say that which you quoted, but I do have a similar opinion.

I've actually had knights and converted pikemen fly across the room. The worst thing that happens is the horse tail breaks or the lance snaps, or the converted pike breaks along the joints - which is really easy to fix.

Dropping a metal converted piece (such as my pistolier champion, say) that has both a rod inside and is stuck by superglue a distance of just two feet makes sure all the metal parts come apart and need to be put together again. Not that hard to do either, but a lot more annoying. Funny thing is, the plastic parts stay together just fine, it's the metal bits that are all over the place.

I really can't understand what models you are using. If we both live in the same physical reality and use the same products then we should get similar results.

MIGHTYPanhead
28-03-2006, 17:48
Well, first of all I didn't say that which you quoted, but I do have a similar opinion.
Dropping a metal converted piece (such as my pistolier champion, say) that has both a rod inside and is stuck by superglue a distance of just two feet makes sure all the metal parts come apart and need to be put together again. Not that hard to do either, but a lot more annoying. Funny thing is, the plastic parts stay together just fine, it's the metal bits that are all over the place.


then I must be in the fourth demension!!!!!

I think it's the comparative way we put our mini's together. Which is a viable factor to consider. I've never pinned in my life, and only some of the earlier metal models i've put together have broken, and are easily fixed. But when a plastic model falls from a good distance, at least from my experiance, the join is stronger than the joints. I've tried to take apart old plastics, and the arm joints normally break before the glued joint

actually, I think the main problem (at least with the pistolier) is that its a plastic/metal mini. I find them a lot weaker. A suggestion is to add a small dot of GS into the join before sticking the two peices together, It'll help the glue "stick" better. also, the glue dries quickly, holding it in place until the GS dries, creating a much stronger bond than just glue.

another suggestions is to "score" the two metal sides that you'll be glueing, It'll give the glue something to hold on to, and give a stronger bond as well.


I really can't understand what models you are using. If we both live in the same physical reality and use the same products then we should get similar results.

now, I disagree, different methods will yeild different results, even with the same products. I know i'm not doing the same things as you are, and thus, our results will vary.

opinions vary as well, so I'm pretty sure I'm beating my head against a brick wall. meh, I like metal, you like plastic, tomato, tomato.

RGB
28-03-2006, 18:42
Hm.

Those may be very useful tips. Hm.

I'll try scoring then, see if it works. All-metals tend to break almost as easily, but it really may be just the plastic-metal interface.

And yes, plastic gule joints are hard to pull apart if stuck well. But then there's nothing a dissceting razor can't do.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
28-03-2006, 18:55
Ungor skirmishers with ungor command
fiends of slanneesh
Forest goblins and spider riders (although they are coming back)
skeletons with great weapons
Mummies
Assorted special characters and almost all monsters
demonic cav is certainly on the block

I don't really play 40k but I think these
Harlequins?
Are there still roughriders?
orc or tyranid squigs?
genestealer cultists?

Okay. Here goes.

Ungor are still very much in the game.
Fiends of Slaanesh. Thats 1. And I was miffed about their exclusion too!
Forest Goblins are coming back.
Skeletons with Great Weapons. Thats 2.
Mummies. sorry, but they still exist. And can be used to represent Tomb Guard
Spesh Characters and Monsters I won't allow, as Special Characters were a rarity on the field, and the Monsters? Oh, go on. Thats 3.
Demonic Cavalry. Only slaanesh had models. Same as now. so that I won't allow.
Harlequins. They had a 3rd Edition Journal entry by Gav, and are *rumoured* to be getting more attention.
Rough Riders are still available.
Squigs. Well, Snots aren't in the game anymore, but Tyranid Squigs can be used to represent Rippers. As such, I'll allow it on the Orks. Thats 4.
Genestealer Cultists. I'm torn. Although I used to run one, they were never really a 'proper' army as such, more an addendum. I think I'll disallow it, as otherwise we'd have to include all addendums, like Daemon World lists etc...

So, in essence, most the models you have listed can either be realistically used to represent other, newer unit types, with one being a genuine case. I hope I've given enough justification for my decisions! Please don't flame me!

Trench_Raider
28-03-2006, 19:52
Leave it to Doc to try to justify it. heh. Your point that some figures an unit types can be proxied in (while true enough) is irellevant to this discussion as the fatc remains that the options were rmoved at some point.

Don't forget Thudd guns, Rapiers, and tarantulas in marine armies. How about ogryns in ork armies? That pushes it up over five and if we go back an edition I can list three time what has been mentioned.


Mooncow-


are...well...dead, but were they ever more than a fringe army-

While Squat armies were never all that common compared to other RT era 40k armies (I can recall seeing four before 2nd editon came out) they did feature quite prominantly in the fluf an rule books. Go back and count the number of pictures featuring Squats or Squat models in the RT book, Compendium, first chapter aproved book, and the first Warhammer Sieg. They were hardly fringe.

The number of actual players should not matter in any event. Simply removing an army with no replacment or even as much as a semi-official "get you by" list was short sighted and caused alot of bad blood.


correct me if Im wrong, but unless all 1st ed books burned up suddenly with an insidious time delay chemical inplemented by GW`25 odd years ago, there is absolutly nothing stopping you using them and the old figures to play your games.


Not really.
The one good thing about GW games is that finding an opponent is quite easy. Were I live I have two lareg groups to choose from and can play several nights a week if I wanted. However if I wanted to play a RT game finding an opponent would be almost impossible...barring driving three hours to see the one friend I know who still plays the system. Thus your argument that those who like older options and dislike GW's policy of simply dropping units and armies should go play the older editions simply does not hold much weight.


but...they do look bad. character does not = humour...


You must not have seen the Kev Adams 40k ork models then.


things have moved on...I wish I could still enjoy a game of galaxian on my old amstrad...but...well, after 2 minutes of nostalgea I think...this is crap-I cant play it!
:rolleyes:
Flash over substance. I still think the Infocom text games were amongst the finest compter games ever scripted. This is the essense of the flash over character argument.

"Trench Raider"

Mad Doc Grotsnik
28-03-2006, 19:57
I guess the point I was making is that *significant* droppage hasn't actually happened since the transition from 2nd Edition to 3rd Edition, and as such, not meaning to be rude or owt, but people really need to move on a bit!

So your White Shields can't be used anymore, at least, not as White Shields, but that was, what, 10+ years ago?

Trench_Raider
28-03-2006, 20:07
Nice attempt to back pedal, Doc. You asked for five examples of units or options that were dropped in the last seven years. You were given quite a few more than that and even then you attempted to minimize it by saying "well, you can simply proxy to dropped material". Then you throw out "people need to move on a bit". Please. Next you will be telling us "perhaps you are in the wrong hobby" ala Paul Sawyer. :eyebrows:

Admit it. You called for some proof of wholesale dropaing of units/armies and got it. Now you are trying to weasel out.


So your White Shields can't be used anymore, at least, not as White Shields, but that was, what, 10+ years ago?

And your point is?

"Trench Raider"

Zzarchov
28-03-2006, 21:48
"Genestealer Cultists. I'm torn. Although I used to run one, they were never really a 'proper' army as such, more an addendum. I think I'll disallow it, as otherwise we'd have to include all addendums, like Daemon World lists etc..."
- Mad Doc Grotsnik

Actually Mad Doc, Genestealers were a proper army before Tyranids gobbled up the model ranges (along with dominators/zoats, and squigs) to get some units quickly to support a whole army. Then they became a sub army in 2nd ed in the back of the Tyranid book.

GW routinely cuts unprofitable lines, its a business above all else. your comment that "2nd Edition to 3rd Edition" is where all the "droppage" has come from is skewed too. Squats and Genestealer Cults were dropped before then, it was merely made official when the system was changed so heavily older lists could not be used. Since 4rth ed is designed to allow you to use anything from 3rd edition, it would be quite impossible for them to cut anything, as people would just keep using the old rules.

GW doesn't come out and scream "we have cut this", they just let it quietly fade until its gone.

Occulto
28-03-2006, 23:34
One more. The SM Razorback.

I've got two sitting at home with the lascannon-plasma turrets.

MIGHTYPanhead
28-03-2006, 23:53
Hm.

Those may be very useful tips. Hm.

I'll try scoring then, see if it works. All-metals tend to break almost as easily, but it really may be just the plastic-metal interface.

And yes, plastic gule joints are hard to pull apart if stuck well. But then there's nothing a dissceting razor can't do.

glad I could help, If you need more in-depth tips/instructions, i can provide. Just shoot a PM.

Commissar von Toussaint
29-03-2006, 01:10
Not really.
The one good thing about GW games is that finding an opponent is quite easy. Were I live I have two lareg groups to choose from and can play several nights a week if I wanted. However if I wanted to play a RT game finding an opponent would be almost impossible...barring driving three hours to see the one friend I know who still plays the system. Thus your argument that those who like older options and dislike GW's policy of simply dropping units and armies should go play the older editions simply does not hold much weight.

BAH HUMBUG!

If you believe, as I do, that the older games are in fact better, you shouldn't be shy about recruiting new players to them. I know it's OT, but I can't let this pass.

The trick of it is finding those old figures and books. Some are pretty hard to come by.

Our group is resorting to proxies and conversions in a major way. I just scratch-built a Rapier (and servitor) the other day. :)

Now it is a little annoying for our newer players to backdate some of their stuff. My friend who plays Imperial Guard is selling off his "new" sponsonless tanks because they are far less effective in 2nd when everything could shoot.

And the new landspeeders don't quite work, either.

But otherwise, retro is the way to go.

Mooncow
29-03-2006, 02:01
http://uk.games-workshop.com/imperialguard/doctrines/2/
scroll down to the bottom...there you go genestealer cults are still doable.

come on guys...do you honestly wish none of the figures had changed in 20 years.

you can play with old minis with a bit of creativeness, but dont complain about having to do that. I guess its the price you gotto pay for refusing to buy anything new.

anyone remember the old marauder space orks...now those were ugly!

Ardathair
29-03-2006, 02:30
you can play with old minis

True but only if you don't want to play in RTs or at a GW store.

Over the past few years, the few times when I've been in a GW store and tried to play the staff has given me flak and tried to get me out because they were too new to the game to recognize my minis as GW and they got embarassed when they found out they were wrong, so they tried harder to get me to leave.

At a RT tourney I was told my IG was not legal because my heavy weapons were carried on the shoulder, old style, not on little carts. The fact that MLs are shoulder fire got them flustered so bad they would have been kicked out of any descent family store for their language.

So if youwant to use older minis, justform your own gaming group because GW conciders us parias. Any descent company tries to maintain repeat customers, GW would prefer to alienate and get rid of them.

Gaebriel
29-03-2006, 04:56
... Dropping a metal converted piece (such as my pistolier champion, say) that has both a rod inside and is stuck by superglue a distance of just two feet makes sure all the metal parts come apart and need to be put together again. Not that hard to do either, but a lot more annoying. Funny thing is, the plastic parts stay together just fine, it's the metal bits that are all over the place.

I really can't understand what models you are using. If we both live in the same physical reality and use the same products then we should get similar results.
Perhaps it's the technique. I use a combination spring steel pin (not too short), Milliput for bonding and Superglue+Plastic cement (where applicable) to melt the whole thing together - Milliput and Superglue give an infernally strong mixture. I have to use heavy tools to pry off the arms of my Space Marines. Though I experienced the same with thoroughly assembled Plastics. And I've seen plastic joints snap off as easily as metals, just because of shabby work.

Agamemnon2
29-03-2006, 06:29
I'm a regular OOPist. My Guard army contains one squad of metal Valhallans, Orlocks old and new, one Goliath, two Underhive Scum and one Bounty Hunter. What bugs me is often not how people treat my oldies (everyone's weapons are WYSIWYG, which counts for a lot), but why all models are not handled consistently. My metal heavy weapons teams can "get away with" being separately based a lot more than the plastic ones. If I ever gather my troops for a game again, I plan to have the FAQ handy with the "separated together for purposes of convenience" paragraph underlined.

I'm planning on getting my hands on some properly old RT-era Imperial Guard which I suppose will not be at all welcome in GW stores. From what I can tell, their policy seems to be "if you can buy it here, it's cool", so at least I'm unlikely to get flak for fielding a Necromunda Scum for my Captain because that fig is readily available via Mail Order.

Earlier in the thread, there was talk about the elusive nature of "character". I cannot admit to ever having witnessed it per se. For my own part, what old models I include are more based on what role I can make them serve in the armylist, and whether or not they look different enough from the current stock to warrant inclusion. For an example, look at this picture:

http://wh40k.worldofspack.com/albums/Spack32/S3500046_01.jpg

They're all still recognizeably IG, even the Beastman, but look unique enough to give any army its own distinct feeling. Nobody likes to see their own army commanded by the exact same Cadian Colonel mini as every other army out there.

Opus T. Penguin
29-03-2006, 06:50
So your White Shields can't be used anymore, at least, not as White Shields, but that was, what, 10+ years ago?

Au Contraire! They are the quintessential Imperial Guard conscripts, even down to the stat line! Conscripts are White Shields in everything but name. I'm glad they were brought back, actually.

I miss my human bombs! (political correctness be damned)

As to daemonic cavalry for WFB, you hade models for all 4 of the main chaos powers, essentially. Bloodletters on Juggers, Plaguebearers on Beasts, and horrors on disks. Yeah, they were't sold as explicit daemonic cavalry models, but the combos were really simple to make. (Note that this is from memory -- I never actually fielded a unit of daemonic cavalry)

Other missing 40k stuff with models:

Chaos

Tzeentch bikes (removed just to make you buy those terrible Screamer models :mad: Admittedly these models weren't explicitly Tzeentch, but by the time I got done with them....)
Tzentch Heavy weapons (ok, so the last models for these were from the Rogue Trader days....)
real pink and blue horrors (just a pet peave of mine)

Nurgle Heavy bolters (I mean there are pictures of these guys in the current codex! C'mon GW) or other heavy weaons.


come on guys...do you honestly wish none of the figures had changed in 20 years.

I don't think any of us wish that -- far from actually. We just wish the quality drop off hadn't been so precipitous at the beginning of 2nd ed 40k. It's taken a long time to recover to the point where the figures are respectable again, and given that gap and the ridiculous price increases for what a lot of us feel is an inferior product to what was available 15 years ago, a lot of us feel that we have no need to buy new miniatures when the ones we have are perfectly good.

Lord Lucifer
29-03-2006, 12:14
you can play with old minis
True but only if you don't want to play in RTs or at a GW store.

*is lucky enough to live in a country where the national GW GT allows 'Squat' Imperial Guard armies*

Let me be your lightning-rod of envious hate :D

Mad Doc Grotsnik
29-03-2006, 16:22
Nice attempt to back pedal, Doc. You asked for five examples of units or options that were dropped in the last seven years. You were given quite a few more than that and even then you attempted to minimize it by saying "well, you can simply proxy to dropped material". Then you throw out "people need to move on a bit". Please. Next you will be telling us "perhaps you are in the wrong hobby" ala Paul Sawyer. :eyebrows:

Admit it. You called for some proof of wholesale dropaing of units/armies and got it. Now you are trying to weasel out.



And your point is?

"Trench Raider"

My point is that since the transition from 1st to 2nd Edition, nigh on 12 years have passed. As such, is it not time to let bygones be bygones, and accept GW is absolutely no different to any other multinational Market leader in any way shape or form?

Ardathair
29-03-2006, 17:26
My point is that since the transition from 1st to 2nd Edition, nigh on 12 years have passed. As such, is it not time to let bygones be bygones, and accept GW is absolutely no different to any other multinational Market leader in any way shape or form?

Fine let bygones be bygones and stop discriminating against those of use who bought GW minis a few years ago. If it wasn't for those of use who played RT, first, and second edition there would be no fourth edition. I own close to a thousand GW minis, and people like you keep whineing that I don't keep buying more and more.

Your comparison to other multinational companies falls kind of flat. Go into a Ford Dealership with a 20 year old F-100, will they try to run you off the lot? NO. Take in a Ford stationwagon, these haven't been made for over a decade, what will happen? Bring in a car from the 1920s and they will love you. These are products which they no longer produce, have been supperseded by improved products, and have no intention of bringing back.

In comparison, take squats or zoats into a GW store and see how you get treated. There are a few people on this forum who have done this and can give you first hand accounts of GW's oppinion of loyal players.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
29-03-2006, 18:02
oh for gods sake. Try reading the entire thread, or at least the posts of the person you intend to have a pop at.

If you had, you might have noticed I am in FAVOUR of using older models. Hell, I probably own way more models than most people on this board, from Adeptus Titanicus right up to the new Tau Piranha. I even have a model from 1984! (the year, not the film!)

So do your homework before posting. Please?

And since the GW policy on WYSIWYG in stores is pretty clear (as in it's essential!) why would you take non-WYSWIYG models into a store to play with? Unless your deliberately trying to look smug and self satisfied? Seriously.

Ardathair
29-03-2006, 18:33
First of all I usually only skim what you post. Besides you read what I have posted, you'll find a some specific examples of what I was refering to. Or were you involved in any of those incidents? If you were then the shoe fits, wear it, if not what makes you think I was refering to you? Most of your buddies at GW are clueless about older GW minis.

Secondly, if you think that every word was directed soley and specifically at you, well there is an old song which fits oh so well, can you guess which song.

I was using WYSIWYG figures when GW staff was being rude. The lascannons were lascannons, the Sentinels were Sentinels, the officers with carapce armor had carapce armor (another player in the store one time had an IG commander, the model had carapace but his army list didn't and no one complained, but then again his was the newer figure). WYSIWYG wasn't the issue for the staff, oop minis was.

And for your information, unless you are trying to take responsibility for every GW staffer, then this is refering to those staffers not you. I am refering to most GW staffers and a few Outriders (most are old school gamers but every once in a while you'll run into a bad apple), who have a problem with older minis. Get them to stop and I'll stop ranting.

Trench_Raider
29-03-2006, 20:40
Doc-

Ardathair beat me to it and expressed my feelings on the matter quite well.

One quick point though....

And since the GW policy on WYSIWYG in stores is pretty clear (as in it's essential!) why would you take non-WYSWIYG models into a store to play with?

As in "esential" you mean "esential to encourage folks to buy more and newer models" of course.
In any event, old models ARE WYSIWYG compliant for the most part. It's not my fault that many GW staffers know very little about the history of the very model ranges they are flogging. As I have often stated any WYSIWYG problems are quickly solved by taking 30 seconds to explain things. I have done so using NON-GW models in the past and had no problems at all. Courtesy and communication are the key.

"Trench Raider"

Ardathair
29-03-2006, 21:18
Ok Mad Doc Grotsnik, I was wrong about you saying we should keep buying new minis.

I have never taken an army into a GW store which I would not normally take to my local gaming group. Over the last 15 years, the everytime I have gone into a GW store I planned on buying something, and usually catcha game as well. (The nearest one is 200 miles away, why would I drive that far just to tick a stranger off?) Half the time I have left without buying something because of the staff's attitude towards old school minis. [Incidentally, I would like to thank them, because each time I was patient, and got the same items later, for cheaper. GW does a good job of inadvertently encouraging gamers to turn to the second hand market and on-line stores.]

As for WYSIWYG. Some staffers have expanded that to mean models your opponent can recognize. If they can not recognize my first ed. sentinel, it is not WYSIWYG, according to some. BS I say.

Didn't you post something about using oop models as something similar. If not this is directed at the person who did. I normally use my Eldar Musicians as Warlocks, can't do it at GW stores, not WYSIWYG. Why? "There are no rules for the harp in his hand or the pipes on his back", "no robes" (had to laugh at that one), and "no sword or spear," even though I did not pay for a Witchblade or Singing Spear so his last arguement was actually supporting their use.

Mooncow
30-03-2006, 01:16
so youre complaining about not being able to play at a shop 200 miles away! If you have 1000 odd figures why dont you bring some of your newer ones when you go to GW?

why do you want to play in a GW so badly? Isnt a game club more comfortable?

Ardathair
30-03-2006, 03:00
so youre complaining about not being able to play at a shop 200 miles away! If you have 1000 odd figures why dont you bring some of your newer ones when you go to GW?

why do you want to play in a GW so badly? Isnt a game club more comfortable?

A) I would like a chance to play at RT tourneys, using my minis.

B) Well your right, GW staff has gone out of their way to make sure I only buy from other sources if I want anything else.

Edit: It is not that I'm so interested in playing at GW store, it is that on the rare occasion I am in one I get treated so badly just for being a loyal player of one of their biggest games that gets to me.

Taliesynkp
30-03-2006, 03:52
Talies, you have me completely wrong. <snip>

Yes, I obviously did. You have my heartfelt apologies.


Tal

Corn Berserker
30-03-2006, 18:02
I deliberately built my Deathguard with 2nd edition Plague Marines - reason: Pickelhaube, hooves and fat belly look ace when compared to the jelly on thin legs in armour which the current ones are.

Your a brave man, when I started collecting Chaos in 2001ish they were still selling the 2nd ed Plague Marines, I wanted to use the plague-knife so not knowing much better I bought 2 boxes (10 marines for £10 - yay!) and painted them up like Ultramarines with red bellies. My painting was fair (despite the dodgy colour scheme) I couldn't take them seriously, all standing the same way with no option for convertion either!

I salute you Bloodknight for doing something I could never do.

Cade
31-03-2006, 15:12
Doc-

Ardathair beat me to it and expressed my feelings on the matter quite well.

One quick point though....


As in "esential" you mean "esential to encourage folks to buy more and newer models" of course.
In any event, old models ARE WYSIWYG compliant for the most part. It's not my fault that many GW staffers know very little about the history of the very model ranges they are flogging. As I have often stated any WYSIWYG problems are quickly solved by taking 30 seconds to explain things. I have done so using NON-GW models in the past and had no problems at all. Courtesy and communication are the key.

"Trench Raider"

Oh for gods sake give it up. You have a real chip on your shoulder about GW. You go on about 'Real' Wargames so often, it makes me wonder why, if they are so great, you bother with GW at all. Me? I lead a busy life. I have a full time job, and a pretty full social calender, which leaves little time really for my Hobby. Thus, the GW rules, with their relative simplicity and abundance of players are a natural choice. For 40k or Warhammer, I have my pick of around 20 opponents. I tried to get into Warmachine, but considering I had two possible opponents, both of whom I don't particularly like, I gave it up. Does that mean Warmachine is rubbish? Nope. It's alright I guess. Bit powergamey for me, but thats personal taste.

IT strikes me that your 'personal bitter experience' of GW is somewhat, well, lame to be honest. I mean, they are a company. Things they do are *no* different to any other company in the world, at all. Why you've chosen to single out GW I don't know. Did they eat your Nan? Molest your Hamster? You seem to be taking pretty trivial things awfully seriously. If you don't feel GW treats it's customers very well, then I'm glad to say your very much in a minority! This is the last I shall say on this subject, and I suggest you have a small period of introspective thought, and consider whether or not your wasting your time whinging about a company thats really nowhere near as bad as you'd like to make out!

*EDIT*

Whoops. Sorry. This is Mad Doc Grotsnik. Am up at Cades for a few days on Holiday! Forgot this was his PC.

Trench_Raider
31-03-2006, 16:27
You have a real chip on your shoulder about GW.

I sure do.
And you defend them at every chance, even refusing to condemn their most questionable of practices.


You go on about 'Real' Wargames so often, it makes me wonder why, if they are so great, you bother with GW at all.

Because I enjoy the games, have alot of money and time invested in miniatures, and like the fact that I can find an opponent without any real effort. I just hate what the company has become.


IT strikes me that your 'personal bitter experience' of GW is somewhat, well, lame to be honest.

Your opinion has been noted....


This is the last I shall say on this subject,

You mean you are FINALLY going to take your own advice and avoid threads that upset you? I'm going to hold you to this so you might rethink that one...heh.


I suggest you have a small period of introspective thought, and consider whether or not your wasting your time whinging about a company thats really nowhere near as bad as you'd like to make out!


And you might stop and think about why there are large numbers of people who think like I do (although admittedly not to the degree I do) and if some of GW's policies an decisons are not worth defending.

"Trench Raider"

chris_valera
01-04-2006, 04:47
Because I enjoy the games, have alot of money and time invested in miniatures, and like the fact that I can find an opponent without any real effort. I just hate what the company has become.

Let's also point out that like it or not, GW is number one. So you really have no choice. It's the standard gaming system. So telling someone to **** off really isn't an option. Especially if that person has spent hundreds or thousands on GW figs. Many of these people still continue to spend, theyre just a bit more thoughtful about their pruchases.

Trenchy paid good money for his toy soldiers and I'm sure he will continue to use them for some time to come. Whether others like it or not.

You know on RGMW, we have a rule, where can't tell someone to NOT talk about how much they hate GW. It's long ago been recognized to be pointless.

Maybe some people here should learn from that. :eyebrows:

To get this on-topic, I'd point out that not only do some of the figs have character, they're also single-piece models. For an older who doesn't have time to paint, that's a godsend. Do you really want to assemble eighty million Skaven Warriors; head, torse, legs, right arm, left arm, shield and a freaking tail? That's a lot of parts some models that are all the same anyway.

There's little point in making plastics posable, if 90% of them are going to be in the same pose anyway. GW seems to have learned this as the Brets, and Lizardmen, and Plague Monks have the torsos connected to the legs and they're working on pre-assembled plastic box sets.

And let's not mention that the old metals have actual models for skaven slaves, which are weedier than the normal models. None of that, "Oh! Paint the bands like leather!" silliness.

Also, some people like making units of models all in the same pose. Trenchy really likes the old Chaos Warriors, and I'm sorta torn. I might order a grip of them, all in the same pose. Or all in different poses, whatever. There's variety.

Some of the older Eldar models have their charm too, with more rounded armor plated, exposed chainmail, and banding on the legs. You can tell the difference between Guardians and Dire Avengers. No more jokes about getting a +1 save from your add-on loincloth.

Finally nostalgia. And yes, it is a good enough reason. Look at all the Thundercats, Transformers, and various 80s t-shirts Hot Topic is selling. They don't seem to give a damn about where the money comes from, why does GW? I have the money to buy all the models I missed out on when I first started playing. As long as the money is going toward GW, what do they care?

It's impossible to keep models in production in forever, I understand, but as GW's fanbase ages, they might wanna consider bringing back certain batch runs of figs as sort of a limited edition thing. Remake the mold, and run it to destruction once a year or so.

I wouldn't mind having Arcane Architecture back... :(

--Chris
*********************

Cade
01-04-2006, 14:26
Seek, and ye shall find!

http://uk.games-workshop.com/storefront/store.uk?do=Individual&code=COMP1199009&orignav=300810

And GW do, occasionally, do limited runs and that, after a fashion. Games Day UK usually has Blisters of Harelquins and that, and if you give MO a call, I think you'd be surprised at whats available.

chris_valera
01-04-2006, 15:17
Seek, and ye shall find!

http://uk.games-workshop.com/storefront/store.uk?do=Individual&code=COMP1199009&orignav=300810

And GW do, occasionally, do limited runs and that, after a fashion. Games Day UK usually has Blisters of Harelquins and that, and if you give MO a call, I think you'd be surprised at whats available.

This is kewl, but I live in the US. So what's shipping going to be like?

--Chris
*********************

Cade
01-04-2006, 15:29
Haven't a clue to be honest. I've just trawled the US Site, and couldn't find it there, but it stands to reason that if it's available here in Britain, then it's available world wide. Why not phone them or E-Mail them and ask?

chris_valera
01-04-2006, 21:21
Haven't a clue to be honest. I've just trawled the US Site, and couldn't find it there, but it stands to reason that if it's available here in Britain, then it's available world wide. Why not phone them or E-Mail them and ask?

Maybe I will. Before I call, is there anything available there that's not available in the US?

--Chris
*********************

Commissar von Toussaint
01-04-2006, 21:58
Let's also point out that like it or not, GW is number one. So you really have no choice. It's the standard gaming system. So telling someone to **** off really isn't an option. Especially if that person has spent hundreds or thousands on GW figs. Many of these people still continue to spend, theyre just a bit more thoughtful about their pruchases.

Pretty much. I would actually find it quite odd if people who had spent hundreds of dollars and countless hours painting their figures didn't get upset as they were rendered useless by subsequent editions.

And one thing I do find really strange is that for a company so interested in making money, GW does an amazing job of blowing opportunities to do so. Their attitude to classic models is merely the example of the moment.


To get this on-topic, I'd point out that not only do some of the figs have character, they're also single-piece models. For an older who doesn't have time to paint, that's a godsend. Do you really want to assemble eighty million Skaven Warriors; head, torse, legs, right arm, left arm, shield and a freaking tail? That's a lot of parts some models that are all the same anyway.

There's little point in making plastics posable, if 90% of them are going to be in the same pose anyway. GW seems to have learned this as the Brets, and Lizardmen, and Plague Monks have the torsos connected to the legs and they're working on pre-assembled plastic box sets.

Amen to that!

I prefer the older models because they were easy to assemble and if you wanted different poses, you bought them. Back then they were cheaper, too.

But sometimes you didn't want different poses. The much-maligned marines that came in the 2nd ed. boxed set have provided years of faithful service. They are WYSIWYG-compliant, don't take up a ton of room and never fall over. Are they museum pieces? Hell, no that's what the characters are for.

Besides, most of the "posable" figures really aren't. They're designed to run, or cradle their bolter, or whatnot. Same as the lead ones, only with more work.

I guess they work fine for 40k, but they are a serious pain for fantasy, where you have to get a unit to actually fit in some sort of formation. Having them all waving their swords flamboyantly makes it almost impossible to rank them up. I'm much more in favor of a regiment looking, er, regimental: Standing at attention and wearing the same sort of clothes.

Zzarchov
02-04-2006, 06:31
Let's also point out that like it or not, GW is number one. So you really have no choice.
I wouldn't mind having Arcane Architecture back... :( [url]

GW is FAR from no.1 in terms of wargaming or even miniature wargaming. Seriously..why does everything think this? Look around , I don't mean games made to compete with them like SST or Warmachine or anything..but GW is much harder to find opponents for than other more popular wargames.

I would believe its the most money making..they charge alot for their product..but popular? Seriously..look around at a wargame hobby store..there are more of them and they are more popular.

GW is just the only one selling to the "Comic Store" crowd.. Comic Book and RPG fans are GW's core target audience..where as most wargames target history buffs or ex-militaria or the retired.

RGB
02-04-2006, 07:25
To get this on-topic, I'd point out that not only do some of the figs have character, they're also single-piece models. For an older who doesn't have time to paint, that's a godsend. Do you really want to assemble eighty million Skaven Warriors; head, torse, legs, right arm, left arm, shield and a freaking tail? That's a lot of parts some models that are all the same anyway.

There's little point in making plastics posable, if 90% of them are going to be in the same pose anyway. GW seems to have learned this as the Brets, and Lizardmen, and Plague Monks have the torsos connected to the legs and they're working on pre-assembled plastic box sets.

And let's not mention that the old metals have actual models for skaven slaves, which are weedier than the normal models. None of that, "Oh! Paint the bands like leather!" silliness.

Also, some people like making units of models all in the same pose. Trenchy really likes the old Chaos Warriors, and I'm sorta torn. I might order a grip of them, all in the same pose. Or all in different poses, whatever. There's variety.


Well, herein lies the problem: Unipose models are a pain. For all that multipose models are hard to doctor to really do what you want, unipose models are ten times as hard and metal uniposes at least twenty times.

I am very very unhappy they're going back to dumb one-two or even unipose models, in short.

When you put your guys together yourself, yes, they do become a bit hard to rank up, but at least they don't look like clones. Make sure they CAN rank up as you put them together, and then mark their position in a regiment on the underside of the base. Should fix all ranking problems quite easily.

Gaebriel
02-04-2006, 07:59
Not all older models are unipose - the 2nd edition metal Marines (as well as Eldar, honestly haven't looked into others) have a range of 12 body poses (make that 18 if including special weapons and the newer metal poses), which are combined with plastic arms. This gives a sturdy body and weight with a good deal of convertability.

For Fantasy I agree with above posters that 'cloned' models are a blessing, and even in 40k I don't convert every trooper to be as individual as a Kill team member...

God of War
02-04-2006, 09:22
While I din't consider myself a "veteran"- been playing for about 6 or 7 years- I thinkit is great to see oop models. I love, LOVE armys with counts as or stand in models. Instead of seeing the same model as joe and bob used, the "proper" one, you see a totally unique army. It's a piece of history, i for one would love to get my hands on some of the old catalogs and minis, if for nothing else than to see the history of the game, where it's come from, and yes, look at all the old models. Like it's been said, alot of those models have character, and that adds alot to a game, a hell of a lot more than a 9 year old with a box of unicolored marines. And sadly, that color is often a nauseating mix of grey and silver. Keep it up vets. And someone get a thread going showing off out of print models. You know you wanna.

chris_valera
02-04-2006, 14:08
Well, herein lies the problem: Unipose models are a pain. For all that multipose models are hard to doctor to really do what you want, unipose models are ten times as hard and metal uniposes at least twenty times.

I am very very unhappy they're going back to dumb one-two or even unipose models, in short.

When you put your guys together yourself, yes, they do become a bit hard to rank up, but at least they don't look like clones. Make sure they CAN rank up as you put them together, and then mark their position in a regiment on the underside of the base. Should fix all ranking problems quite easily.

Understood, and I recognize some people dig the plastics over the old stuff for various reasons. I just don't go out of my way to poop all over your opinion, like GW does with their vets.

--Chris
*********************

Cade
02-04-2006, 15:51
You know, thinking about this, either people are making up this 'anti old policy' or it's only in the US. Certainly, here in Britain I've never heard of GW refusing the use of one of their models just because theres a newer sculpt. Honestly. Quite the opposite in fact.....

chris_valera
02-04-2006, 17:05
You know, thinking about this, either people are making up this 'anti old policy' or it's only in the US. Certainly, here in Britain I've never heard of GW refusing the use of one of their models just because theres a newer sculpt. Honestly. Quite the opposite in fact.....

Actually, I'd say the exact opposite, I hear stories coming more outta England than in the US. I hear stories of people being turned away from tourneys or banned from stores for having old models. Yeah, it does happen.

One kid had his older brother's hand-me-down models and had the ancient beakie land speeder. Which had one weapon, but was still legal under the rules. The managaer banned him. Took a letter to the GW higher-ups to straighten him out.

There was, however a notice in the US edition of WD saying all older models were still legal complete with pics of the old metal Necrons, and old monopose plastic halberdier, etc.

Whether this is official company policy or GW staff abusing their authority isn't really clear, but there's more than a few instances of this happening. Way to make someone feel welcome to the officially official Games Workshop Hobby. Kinda gives you a warm fuzzy to know that all that money was well spent...

--Chris
*********************

chris_valera
02-04-2006, 17:07
Well, herein lies the problem: Unipose models are a pain. For all that multipose models are hard to doctor to really do what you want, unipose models are ten times as hard and metal uniposes at least twenty times.

I am very very unhappy they're going back to dumb one-two or even unipose models, in short.

When you put your guys together yourself, yes, they do become a bit hard to rank up, but at least they don't look like clones. Make sure they CAN rank up as you put them together, and then mark their position in a regiment on the underside of the base. Should fix all ranking problems quite easily.

Thy're doing both, which is really the best of both worlds approach. Multi-part kits for thsoe who want them, and monopose add-on ranks for kids, and people who don't have time to assemble pieces or like the "clone army" look.

--Chris
*********************

RGB
02-04-2006, 17:17
Yeah, it's kind of true. The WE are very multipose, the new O&G look like they will be clones.

Well, we'll see. My frustration in yesterday's post stems from converting unipose spearmen into pikes held at high porte, and let me tell you - UGH. You have to chop off the hands, the arms, lengthen and splint the pike in two places, use greenstuff to create the angle you like, then glue and splint it all together.

If only I had more guys from the Soldiers box left over. But I don't.

Ardathair
02-04-2006, 17:39
posted by chris_valera:
Whether this is official company policy or GW staff abusing their authority isn't really clear, but there's more than a few instances of this happening. Way to make someone feel welcome to the officially official Games Workshop Hobby. Kinda gives you a warm fuzzy to know that all that money was well spent...

It probably isn't official GW policy to kick veteran players out of stores and tourneys just for using old minis, but they certanly do not do much, if anything, to prevent it from happening time and again.


posted by chris_valera:
There was, however a notice in the US edition of WD saying all older models were still legal complete with pics of the old metal Necrons, and old monopose plastic halberdier, etc.

What was the WD# I would like to have a copy so the next time I go to an RT tournament, or GW store I have it avilable just in case. The way things go if I have it with me I'll probably run into veterans who won't have a problem, if I don't I'll encounter the new mini nazis.

chris_valera
02-04-2006, 21:01
It probably isn't official GW policy to kick veteran players out of stores and tourneys just for using old minis, but they certanly do not do much, if anything, to prevent it from happening time and again.

Understood and agreed, although I think it's GW's corporate culture more than anything. If GW could ban players with OOP figs, I'm sure they would, in a heartbeat.


What was the WD# I would like to have a copy so the next time I go to an RT tournament, or GW store I have it avilable just in case. The way things go if I have it with me I'll probably run into veterans who won't have a problem, if I don't I'll encounter the new mini nazis.

Sorry dude, I don't know off hand. I think it might be somewhere in the 230's 240's or 250's. I know that doesn't really help, but it was after 40K3 was released. If I come across it again I'll let you know.

It would probably be of interest to the grognards here.

--Chris
*********************

Crazy Harborc
03-04-2006, 01:49
One of the advantages of having the armies I want already? New minies that are unipose are NOT a problem. I just intermix old with the new, that takes care of the unipose problem.

I WANT non multi-part plastic minies. For me the minies are a means to an end......Lots of minies on the battlefield.

Cade
03-04-2006, 14:00
Understood and agreed, although I think it's GW's corporate culture more than anything. If GW could ban players with OOP figs, I'm sure they would, in a heartbeat.



Sorry dude, I don't know off hand. I think it might be somewhere in the 230's 240's or 250's. I know that doesn't really help, but it was after 40K3 was released. If I come across it again I'll let you know.

It would probably be of interest to the grognards here.

--Chris
*********************

Ummmm....They can. If they want to. And as they *haven't* it's safe to say they won't. Believe it or not, but a few pretty isolated incidents of GW staffers being Buttpipes does NOT mean that being a Buttpipe is Company Policy. I used to work for them. We were meant to encourage the use of older models. If GW had *any* kind of anti-old model policy, why in the name of Satans Portion would they bother with Mail Order archives etc? Wouldn't it just be easier, to enforce such a ban (which doesn't exist!) by destroying the older moulds?

Seriously. Before you go bashing a company using baseless information, apply a little logic. This is what winds me up. Are GW a nice company? Yeah, I reckon so. Do they get everything right 100% of the time? Hell no. They've made some bad calls in their time, with the rather drastic change between 2nd and 3rd Edition 40k being one of them. Okay, 3rd Ed wasn't a *bad* game as such, it's just, in MY OPINION (thats the important bit!) 2nd Edition was more, well, fulfilling.

But when people blatantly make stuff up, or go on shonky hearsay, I get irritated. I know what GW try to do, and it's all in the customers interests (after all, the customers pay for GW to exist you know). Then a bunch of people decide to basically slander the company, with their sole 'proof' the ability to scream *FANBOY!* at anyone who disagrees, well, they can just sod right off. To put it lightly.

Osbad
03-04-2006, 14:02
I know what GW try to do, and it's all in the customers interests (after all, the customers pay for GW to exist you know)

wtf? Is this an ironic statement?

OK, so GW don't actually go out and shoot their customers as they walk through the store door, but they've done everything short of that to chase 'em away these days - increased prices, disappearing WD content, reducing store opening hours, yadda, yadda, yadda...

How can any of those measures be deemed to be "in the customers' interests" when they mean the customer pays more for a less fulfilling experience?

I'm a GW customer (or used to be), and I sure don't feel like my "interests" have been served recently...

chris_valera
03-04-2006, 16:29
wtf? Is this an ironic statement?

OK, so GW don't actually go out and shoot their customers as they walk through the store door, but they've done everything short of that to chase 'em away these days - increased prices, disappearing WD content, reducing store opening hours, yadda, yadda, yadda...

How can any of those measures be deemed to be "in the customers' interests" when they mean the customer pays more for a less fulfilling experience?

I'm a GW customer (or used to be), and I sure don't feel like my "interests" have been served recently...

Pissing away several million dollars on Warhammer onliune and the raising prices to compensate doesn't exactly give me a warm fuzzy, either.

--Chris
*********************

chris_valera
03-04-2006, 16:33
Ummmm....They can. If they want to. And as they *haven't* it's safe to say they won't. Believe it or not, but a few pretty isolated incidents of GW staffers being Buttpipes does NOT mean that being a Buttpipe is Company Policy. I used to work for them. We were meant to encourage the use of older models. If GW had *any* kind of anti-old model policy, why in the name of Satans Portion would they bother with Mail Order archives etc? Wouldn't it just be easier, to enforce such a ban (which doesn't exist!) by destroying the older moulds?

Seriously. Before you go bashing a company using baseless information, apply a little logic. This is what winds me up. Are GW a nice company? Yeah, I reckon so. Do they get everything right 100% of the time? Hell no. They've made some bad calls in their time, with the rather drastic change between 2nd and 3rd Edition 40k being one of them. Okay, 3rd Ed wasn't a *bad* game as such, it's just, in MY OPINION (thats the important bit!) 2nd Edition was more, well, fulfilling.

But when people blatantly make stuff up, or go on shonky hearsay, I get irritated. I know what GW try to do, and it's all in the customers interests (after all, the customers pay for GW to exist you know). Then a bunch of people decide to basically slander the company, with their sole 'proof' the ability to scream *FANBOY!* at anyone who disagrees, well, they can just sod right off. To put it lightly.\

It's not hearsay that WD ran a notice saying that older models were a-okay for tourneys. Why'd they have to do that again? Because people were being told, or were getting the impression, that older models were banned.

--Chris
*********************

Ardathair
04-04-2006, 00:53
Posted by Cade:

But when people blatantly make stuff up, or go on shonky hearsay, I get irritated. I know what GW try to do, and it's all in the customers interests (after all, the customers pay for GW to exist you know). Then a bunch of people decide to basically slander the company, with their sole 'proof' the ability to scream *FANBOY!* at anyone who disagrees, well, they can just sod right off. To put it lightly.

OK, next time I go to a Rogue Trader Tournament or Games Workshop store and get asked to leave for using old minis I will refuse to leave until they sign a document stating why they asked me to leave. Or should I honor their request and leave but ask them to step outside to explain themselves? Either of these two options are not available, the second one can easily be construed as a threat (admit it that was the first thing you thought of).

You don't seem to believe that these events happen unless you have proof, what proof, they can lie and you would believe them when it is their word against someone elses, everytime.

I'm not saying every GW staffer does this, but enough of them do and nothing is done to curb this behavior.

P.S. Is this really Cade or is that still Mad Doc Grotsnik logged onto Cade's computer?

Occulto
04-04-2006, 02:23
I'm a GW customer (or used to be), and I sure don't feel like my "interests" have been served recently...

Horses for courses.

Considering I've had one game in my entire life at a GW (thanks Alco) I couldn't give a rats about how often GW stores are open - as long as I can go in after work and buy the things I need. It's a store, not a social club.

Yup, I love the fact my figure purchases pay so some parents have a daycare centre or a bunch of teenagers get to sit round feeling "cool" because they're hanging out at their local GW. School holidays? I avoid the place like the plague. (My girlfriend won't even go within 50m of the place because of the stench wafting out the door.)

How often do you go past a GW store in the middle of the day and there's one or two people just sitting round talking to redshirts? Why pay for an employee to sit there hoping that they'll make a sale? How is paying unnecessary wages "in my interest?"

I'm not having a personal go at you mate. What I'm saying is that plenty of people have different ideas of what they want from GW. A guy who lives 5 minutes from a store won't care what they do with Mail Order, but a person 200 miles from the nearest store won't care when they're open.

I'd say only thing that most GW gamers share in common, is that they'd like it very much if the company didn't go bankrupt.

Cade's on the money. GW have screwed up in the past and will probably continue to screw up in the future. But everything unpalatable that happens is not a conspiracy, the suits aren't out to screw you personally, because ultimately you don't have to buy what they're selling.


You don't seem to believe that these events happen unless you have proof, what proof, they can lie and you would believe them when it is their word against someone elses, everytime.

I'm not saying every GW staffer does this, but enough of them do and nothing is done to curb this behavior.

How many is enough? I've never encountered or read about anyone (except on Warseer) who was actually told to leave because of the date of their figures. In fact, every GW staffer I've met has drooled over the prospect of using old models.

Dr Death
04-04-2006, 13:51
As far as to what extent my "interests are being served" im not quite sure, i dont know enough about the inner sanctum of Games Workshop as such notable individuals as Grotsnik and Cade seems to but i do know one thing my "customer satisfaction" aint all that high.

And anyway, what precisely are my interests? What is this Golden egg which GW are so carefully nuturing away from my blinded eyes? As Occulto says, we would very much like it if GW didnt go bankrupt, but that isnt "my interests" that isnt something we the gamer hold unique. Anyone involved in the company would very much like it if they didnt go bankrupt, its not something you can use as an excuse for a dropping quality or a threat of a future that didnt involve extortionate price rises.

No, my interests are getting quality miniatures and material for worlds which i adore as cheaply as possible. These interests of mine are most certainly not being served of late and no amount of flimsy catch-all excuses are going to ammend that.

Contrary to what Occulto says i do not consider GW's "suits" to be maliciously corrupting the good name of the company. What i do beleive however is that whoever's in the "head box" in the ivory tower isnt making to good of a job of things and that something needs to be done about it.

Dr Death

Old School
04-04-2006, 14:01
What would happen if GW did end up going under and ceased to exist?

What rights would they still have over their Intellectual Property and trademarks etc?

Could any other miniature manufacturer suddenly bring out a new range of 28mm Sci-Fi soldiers called 'Empirical Space Marines' that just happened to look a lot like GW old ones?

Taliesynkp
04-04-2006, 14:35
Ummmm....They can. If they want to. And as they *haven't* it's safe to say they won't.

See, Cade. There's a lot of us that just don't believe that. It seems more like GW floated a couple of trial balloons about banning OOP stuff. When faced with serious outrage they back off. Doesn't mean they won't try again, though.

Doesn't really matter much here, anyway. With the elimination of GTs in the US, they have no influence on who uses what anymore. People who were never actually going to go to a GT used to build GT legal armies "just in case". Now I'm starting to see mini's from a lot of other companies mixed into GW armies, let alone OOP GW stuff.

Tal

chris_valera
04-04-2006, 16:19
What would happen if GW did end up going under and ceased to exist?

What rights would they still have over their Intellectual Property and trademarks etc?

Could any other miniature manufacturer suddenly bring out a new range of 28mm Sci-Fi soldiers called 'Empirical Space Marines' that just happened to look a lot like GW old ones?

Copyright reverts to the opriginal owners +75 years, IIRC. So even if they went outta business in 2007, you wouldn't legally be able to produce knock-off figs until 2082.

Good luck with that.

Realistically people do make knockoff figs. Enigma made "Star Marines," "Star Guard" etc, and were taken to court. The case never resolved (GW has money) but the molds were placed in seizure, which flat-out killed the company, such as it was. They kinda asked for it though. Some of their stuff was obviously GW models cast with some extra doodads sculpted on, and recast in very poor soft (lead) metal.

Demonblade was taken to court by GW for being "too similar" which is a tragedy, right there.

If you want knock-off figs, you don't need to look very hard. The VOID stuff is pretty good for Marines/IG, therre were also some great "large" figs to use as Terminators. The basic Mutant Chronicles box set is also great for basic IG.

(BTW anyone know that store where you can still buy Mutant Chronicles?...)

There was also kiddie game that had a grip of plastic Space Marine knockoffs. They were pretty average, but the game came with a ton of them. Anyone know the name?

So yeah, don't worry about making knock-off figs, there are plenty of manufacturers that make stuff that fit the bill.

--Chris
*********************

boogle
04-04-2006, 16:57
dreamforge are another example of a company GW took to court for copyright infringement

Zzarchov
04-04-2006, 17:38
I love how GW tries to copywrite names like "Space Marines" and "Imperial Guard"... Those have been science fiction staples since the 30's and earlier.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
04-04-2006, 18:47
Pissing away several million dollars on Warhammer onliune and the raising prices to compensate doesn't exactly give me a warm fuzzy, either.

--Chris
*********************

Well, it;s their money to '**** away', like it or not. And just like every other company in the world, they make their money from CUSTOMERS.

I mean, I know it's a radical theory, but it seems to work!

Quin 242
04-04-2006, 18:54
Chripes all you thread hijackers and whiney bitches!

Just stay on topic as to why YOU LIKE or PREFER older minis.

Does every topic have to have you whining bitching and complaining about GW and it's practices.

Stay on topic for once or stay the hell out.

Can we get a mod in here to clean this thread up?

I'd like to see what people feel about the actual question.

chris_valera
04-04-2006, 19:03
Well, it;s their money to '**** away', like it or not. And just like every other company in the world, they make their money from CUSTOMERS.

I mean, I know it's a radical theory, but it seems to work!

So I'm supposed to be happy that they raised prices?

Especially considering they could have licensed out the imagery as they've done before. This was done so they could keep it all for themselves. Fine, but now they have nothing to show for it. It was a bad business decision, pure and simple. And I'm the one that gets stuck with the bill.

Am I supposed to be happy about that?

--Chris
*********************

Quin 242
04-04-2006, 19:09
So I'm supposed to be happy that they raised prices?

Especially considering they could have licensed out the imagery as they've done before. This was done so they could keep it all for themselves. Fine, but now they have nothing to show for it. It was a bad business decision, pure and simple. And I'm the one that gets stuck with the bill.

Am I supposed to be happy about that?

--Chris
*********************

Please see my post directly above this drivel.

Please post your flaming and whining in another thread.

This has nothing to do with how you feel about the old minis or what attracts you to them.

75hastings69
04-04-2006, 19:18
Back on topic, did anyone else see the unreleased Dark Elf stuff on ebay from Vongoosewink? The unreleased Malekith went for just short of £700!!!! Now whoever won that (Porkweasel) must love old minis (or really rare ones?).

Quin 242
04-04-2006, 19:23
I've seen a few unreleased old minis go for SICK amounts of cash...

Some of the Confrontation minis go for some serious dough and the few unreleased "new Version" of Squats went for a couple hundred each.

They were some cool figs tho.. lots of celtic details and stuff.. looked very space norse :)

Case in point... one on E-bay right now :)
http://cgi.ebay.com/Warhammer-40K-SQUAT-AXE-BERSERKER-1993-unreleased_W0QQitemZ8788979274QQcategoryZ123867QQs sPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Mad Doc Grotsnik
04-04-2006, 19:34
Me? I've got a Cassius with Combi-Flamer sitting in it's Blister, and about 3 years worth of GD minis all awaiting Ebay.

In about 10 years! Woocha!

RevEv
04-04-2006, 21:23
It's not only the older models that go for silly money - my GD model from a couple of years ago (the Storm of Chaos special character - I don't play any chaos so can't remeber his name) went for £25 on ebay. Paid for my ticket at least.

As for why the fascination with older models. I've been painting up some hammerers recently that I've had for 8 years. Looking at them I asked myself what makes them special compared to modern dwarf figures and I came up with one conclusion - they're not as fussy. They have simpler lines, less clutter on them and make for a far more eye pleasing unit when finished. Saying that the special characters have improved - the old throne of power and anvil of doom are sitting at a friends waiting to be sold as the new models are far more in line with where I see Dwarfs.

As for IG - the new Vostrians are ridiculous. The models are far too cluttered and overdressed. Give me Tallarn any day.

(talking of p***ing away - at least at the end of the day we have something to show for our hard earnt mone other than urine stained trousers and a hang over).

Taliesynkp
05-04-2006, 17:04
Back on topic, did anyone else see the unreleased Dark Elf stuff on ebay from Vongoosewink? The unreleased Malekith went for just short of £700!!!! Now whoever won that (Porkweasel) must love old minis (or really rare ones?).

I always wondered about the prices things go for on e-bay. Then I went to a couple of tournaments. There I met people with ungodly ammounts of money and (for varied reasons) no hope of anything resembling a normal life. Lots of people have hobby budgets in the thousand-pound per month range and some of them play GW games.

Zzarchov
05-04-2006, 17:49
I too find the new models TOO detailed..most people, especially soldiers..don't have that much dangling gadgetry, it gets caught in things and gets you killed.

Commissar von Toussaint
05-04-2006, 18:45
I too find the new models TOO detailed..most people, especially soldiers..don't have that much dangling gadgetry, it gets caught in things and gets you killed.

Yep. If you look at historicals, you don't see nearly that much junk on them.

The thing that really amuses me is GW's skull fetish. It's only getting worse. Okay guys, we get it, grim dark future. Great. Enough with the skulls already.

I'm to the point where I file them off.

Nurglitch
05-04-2006, 18:49
I'm surprised at just how much junk I had to cut off the last GW miniatures I bought. Mind you, once the sculpts have been cleaned up, and all the iconography removed, they make decent generic sci-fi models. And it's pretty easy to clean those raised areas off plastic models.

Commissar von Toussaint
05-04-2006, 20:29
I think that's what I liked about VOID's stuff: the models had a lot of the early GW look but were nice and clean sculpts.

Why pay a premium for something I need to modify anyway?

RGB
05-04-2006, 20:46
I have to agree about the skulls and the spikey bits.

But then I play Empire and stuff like that so I'm not too bothered. I do sympathise with VC and Chaos players though.

Agamemnon2
06-04-2006, 05:26
Well put, CvT. Especially since adding skulls and spikes is a lot easier than removing them. I've been meaning to order some VOID and Urban War stuff, been put off by the uncertainty of shipping so far.

Chuffy
06-04-2006, 07:42
I too find the new models TOO detailed..most people, especially soldiers..don't have that much dangling gadgetry, it gets caught in things and gets you killed.

I completely agree.

Plus it's always a pain wondering what are flash/mould lines and what bits are actually a part of the model.

And then when it comes round to painting you can't be bothered to paint all that small detail on someones belt.

Also I agree with RevEv, the Vostroyans are just SILLY. Or thilly, if you want to sound camp.

Rick_1138
06-04-2006, 12:47
just got a second ed box of 8 all metal termies with sgt and librarian, with polystyrene nits for all the models, bopx is about twice the size of new termie box, now if i was buying £20 worth of stuff, i woul;d feel much happier buying a box with 8 figs, and a sturdy 'box' feel to it.

Will paint them up nicely and sell them on, as i had a plan for a librarian conversion, but used a grey knight termy instead. but the old modelf are really nicely detailed, when compared to first generation plastic termies, but new plastic ones are really nicely detailed, but it does bring back some nice memories, specifically the blood angels dreadnought, all metal, bit polystyrene box for £12!!!, sigh

Anvilbrow
20-04-2006, 05:04
Back on topic, did anyone else see the unreleased Dark Elf stuff on ebay from Vongoosewink? The unreleased Malekith went for just short of £700!!!! Now whoever won that (Porkweasel) must love old minis (or really rare ones?).

I feel ill every time I read another thread that mentions the vast sums people pay for old and/or unreleased minis. About eight years ago, due to an interstae move, I parted ways with several of the unreleased squats (they are on the cover of one of the older catalogs) as well as unreleased dark riders, Malekith on the Hydra, executioners and a very rare unreleased fantasy chimera for Chaos. This of course is not to mention my old Fantasy Slann and Zoats, Chaos Dwarfs (4000+ points of them), plus many models dating back to 2nd editin and pre-slotta days!!!!!!!!!

Like Mad Doc, now I hold onto every mini, perhaps someday to sell, more likely because a time will come when I really wish I hadn't seen their backs...

What's worse, is most of the stuff was sold for it's value by WEIGHT!!!!.. A buddy of mine traded in old figs for all systems and he had a scale for how much he'd pay BY WEIGHT. My Chaos Dwarfs went for around $75... My 3000 point Slann... about $200. Lesson learned.

BTW Trench Raider, I'm now one of the guys who bids against you on Ebay for older stuff. Perhaps we could work something out???

angora
20-04-2006, 06:43
I've plenty of old minis in my collection. I occasionally ferret through them and find a gem. I just started work on the old squat engineer which is a nice model. Mind you they did produce some junk back then too. Check out the old mouth of sauron from the orginal citadel LORT stuff or the legolas. Man they were duff models.

Quin 242
20-04-2006, 12:29
yeah there are some pretty %&%# models from back in the day too... For whatever reason they had a batch of helmetless marines that looked like plague victems. And about the same time came out with the rules for the Legion of the Damned which as far as I can tell excused the **** poor sculpting saying that they HAD some kind of Plague :)

The Emperor
20-04-2006, 14:43
I'd just like to throw Bretonnian Questing Knights on the list of units that were eliminated with the changeover between editions. While there're still Questing Knights, the old ones were effectively eliminated by taking away their lances, when all the old models had lances, and equipping them with great swords.

As far as old models are concerned, I'd kill to get my hands on this guy.

t-tauri
20-04-2006, 16:08
yeah there are some pretty %&%# models from back in the day too... For whatever reason they had a batch of helmetless marines that looked like plague victems. And about the same time came out with the rules for the Legion of the Damned which as far as I can tell excused the **** poor sculpting saying that they HAD some kind of Plague :)
IIRC the only helmetless marine in the LotD range is Sergeant Centurius who I'll gladly take off your habds. ;)

Quin 242
21-04-2006, 00:32
IIRC the only helmetless marine in the LotD range is Sergeant Centurius who I'll gladly take off your habds. ;)

this was in the Beakie only days before the mk7 had been built yet. I meant these guys: http://www.solegends.com/citrt/rt101spacemarines.htm

if you look at brothers Harris and Meridith and Captain's Newmar and Romero you will see the very first figs painted as Legion of the Damned. i think those figs were on sale at the same time as the 1st rules for them were published.

jansenm
22-04-2006, 00:47
well i still go online to but old minis
so I have a unique mixmatch of different units
there are old but still nice models so imma happy with it