View Full Version : Does anyone else prefer less detailed models?

15-04-2011, 18:44
While I love some of the highly detailed figs GW makes, I am only a mediocre painter. I prefer the plain plastic marines as they have larger flatter less ‘cluttered’ painting surfaces. I like the Uber detail for command sqds, but for troops, I like plain for ease of painting. Does anyone else feel this way as well?

15-04-2011, 18:53
I can see where you are coming from. There is a lot more to paint and potentially look bad on the more detailed models. I'll give you points for just trying to paint the minis, especially if you're not one of the greatest painters of your generation.

I still like the detailed figures more, but I admit that it does get a little tedious trying to go through and color all the little bags, ammo pouches, aquilas, scrolls, and skulls.

Night Bearer
15-04-2011, 19:00
Painting-wise I go back and forth. Fex, between 'vanilla' SM and CSMs, there are times where the baroque CSM armour seems easier to paint because there's natural detail breaking things up, whereas the relatively plain armour of the SMs can feel intimidating because I think you kinda have to be good with shading and highlighting to make it look good and not really simple plain.

But then the next week I'll completely change opinion, and feel SMs are much easier and less fiddly without all that extra detail!

15-04-2011, 19:03
This pretty well describes my thinking.

I prefer a simplified look to basic infantry. With so many gibbins and doo-dads, the models take longer to paint and can become muddled.

To borrow from Independent Characters, sometimes it seems like GW has Glenn Danzig designing models.

15-04-2011, 19:05
I like the details. I just don't like painting them. Even the AoBR Marines took me, like, over a month to paint. That said, I prefer "better" models as they cost so damn much.

15-04-2011, 19:05
The more detail the more likely a model has a set theme to it that you don't actually want, too. Take molded shoulder pads for example. If GW were to mould Us on the tactical box set's pads, people wouldn't like if their chapter symbol is not an U. (Is it a U or an U? It's a vowel but an U doesn't sound right.)

Same with the wings and grails all over the blood angels or the writing all over the grey knights.

So yes, sometimes less is more.

15-04-2011, 19:06
i like the not to OTT detail on minis, love the old metals. Tallarn, SL etc as they were really nice and not to over the top with crap. now upto date metals are to crambed with stuff thats not needed i find.

15-04-2011, 19:18
Models cluttered with detail often hide a lack of imagination and style. It's also due to the marine fever in this game, where at some point its impossible to make distinguished chapters without loading them with kitchy stuff.

So nope, I'm more a sucker fore clean models with a few points of interests.

15-04-2011, 19:27
I'm finding the Cadians to be exactly where I want to be, challenge-wise. There are a few layers of fabric and armor, relatively simple gear, and just a little bare skin. One step up from that is the Kasrkin.

Any more detailed than that, and I'd have a hard time getting through 90+ of the guys.

If I were to field an elite-style army of Terminators or something like that, I'd want more detail, effectively compressing the same amount of painting effort and time into fewer models.

15-04-2011, 19:32
I do not prefer less detailed models.

I do prefer that my painting skills become better so that i can do them justice (looking at you Kantor).

15-04-2011, 19:42
I've just built my first squad of Grey Hunters using the new Space Wolf boxed set and it's a revelation! After the first 2, I dived into my bitz box and started using vanilla components. With so many details on all the figures, I was having trouble distingushing my Wolf Guard from the Grey Hunters. I know each marine is an individual, but I definetely prefer the less detailed models in this case.

16-04-2011, 00:19
I prefer less detailed models with more "movement." I detest many of the metal models not just because of the overuse of detail but because of the static poses.

To name just a few of the static models; Sicarius, Crowe, Mephiston, and Karandras.

16-04-2011, 00:22
What's really annoying are those models that have both tons of detail in areas and lots of large flat surfaces. And are big. I'm looking at you, Mars pattern Titans. Yes, both of you. Warhound Ferrus Lupis, you have taken me probably 3 years to get half done, and I am not that great of a painter. And you, Reaver whose name I forget because I haven't added it to the scrollwork yet, at least you are simpler in some parts, with an interior that is mostly easily removed parts.

16-04-2011, 00:33
I'm with you, but only because I remove ALL of the detail from my marines before adding my own in. There are no scrolls, no purity seals, and on my guard forces no aquillas or skulls either. After that I put in 'cartouches' for my chapter markings and equipment details, it's a lot of work on standard marine kits, the BA stuff is a nightmare and I haven't even looked at getting some of the GK plastics in, serious GSing would be required just to get to flat surfaces to start anew from. That's just for my army though, not really from a painting view. If you really struggle with detail I'd suggest painting your marines with the arms seperate, assembling them fully once they're painted. It makes things much easier where fiddly bits are concerned, half the battle is clean and easy access for a paintbrush.

16-04-2011, 00:58
I'd prefer every model to be like a super detailed forgeworld model. I love the new GK models and the TK Sphinx (all the fine details)...and can't wait to paint my maelstrom chimera and FW models :)

I figure, we paying for this, I want the best possible quality and look as possible. (same reason refuse to use models i dont like).


16-04-2011, 01:06
In a sense, I prefer the clean lines of the Eldar range to the increasingly cluttered Space Marine stuff. The excess of detail does suit the gothic baroque ofthe Imperium though, I can't wait for very ornate SoB plastics.

16-04-2011, 01:12
A very good point. My only qualifier is that I'd like basic detail to be stunning, but forget purity seals and the such, we can put them on from a sprue or model them ourselves if a plastic piece is considered clunky. I don't like that they're everywhere on the current imperial sprues, let me decide whether I want them...

16-04-2011, 01:19
(Is it a U or an U? It's a vowel but an U doesn't sound right.)

U may be a vowel, but its name starts with a consonant (y, which isn't always one... but it is in this case).

16-04-2011, 01:19
PI don't mind highly detailed characters. Even squad sergeants, or equivalents. But I like my basic troops to be pretty plain. It makes for much faster easier painting. Those that prefer more detail can freehand, or sculpt, or convert to achieve it.

The bearded one
16-04-2011, 01:25
The troops are fine being a bit more simple ( although I do not mind the new greatly detailed bits as long as they are not applied over the top. Purity seals everywhereeee!!! ) , but I like my commanders, sergeants and other centerpiece models to have superfluous amounts of detail. In fact to me the dreadknight just looks a bit off because it has huge flat and open area's. All it has is metal panels and cilinders and the only detailed area is the driver.

Sgt John Keel
16-04-2011, 01:33
I prefer to make a distinction between more detailed and more details, but whatever.

Personally, I hate large, flat areas because I suck at making them look good (without cheating with weathering etc.). Small details require less advanced techniques.

16-04-2011, 01:38
Small details aren't the same as more detailed, I agree. But it annoys me that the newer kits are full of small details rather than being more detailed, I prefer a cleaner 'basic' model with more options available. The Tau kits are a perfect example of an exemplary kit, in my opinion at least... All the bases covered but with enough bits to make them your own out of the box. People like me will always manage to mangle and model themselves a unique unit but GW should offer that level of customisation straight away.

16-04-2011, 01:54
I prefer my models with less extraneous crap on them - to this end, I do not add more skulls, purity seals and other crud except where I deem it necessary. Veterans get extra ammo pouches and so on.
I'm also not a fan of having the commander more blinged up than anyone else. Makes him a bullet magnet.

16-04-2011, 02:12
I prefer extreme detail, I can't stand it when I can see a flat surface. Im all about over the top gawdy looking art and artwork. I really hated Marines back in 3rd edition, but now that the basically fell through a catholic church basilica roof and hit every piece of art and artefact on the way down I like them.

chamelion 6
16-04-2011, 02:54
I actually find the more detailed models easier to paint, but then I cheat. Generally, my space marines are all spray painted, a few obivious details painted in, eyes, large logos on their chests and maybe a larger detail or two. Then they get a wash of either dark brown or black depending on which one I'm painting, (My marine chapter has 2 distinct battle armour colors, a green tactical suit and a metalic grey support suit).

The wash, if it's done carefully get into all those nooks and crannies and really makes the detail come alive. It looks like it took a lot more work than it really does and it goes by really gast. I can almost paint a unit of marines in a few hours.

16-04-2011, 03:06
I prefer more less detailed figures as well. I'm not the best painter, but I do enjoy sculpting onto plain figures and making them more unique - necron warriors are great in this respect, I've been sculpting scales and lovecraftian symbols onto their armour and heads. I cant really do that sort of thing if there is already a lot of detail.

16-04-2011, 03:57
I hate agreeing with Chromedog (we differ on so much) but we're right on ths one. Putting purity seals on isn't neccessary, we can 'veteran' them up if we choose. The same goes for tabbards, weaponary and heads. If it's an option it's fine, if they've made it the only choice for representing a basic choice then I take issue.

16-04-2011, 05:42
In a sense, I prefer the clean lines of the Eldar range to the increasingly cluttered Space Marine stuff. The excess of detail does suit the gothic baroque ofthe Imperium though, I can't wait for very ornate SoB plastics.

It's like you're inside my head :) this is spot on. The firepike exarch and Swooping Hawk exarch are two of my favourite models, ever.

It really depends on the model - I think Draigo looks like a &$@# with all that carving all over the place but M' Ra is one of my favourite models.

On t'other hand whilst saving for a Phantom, the huge empty planes are making me P*** myself. :eek:

Marine's are annoying, so many models would make great converting pieces if they weren't covered in chapter specific symbols.

Random aside WTF happened to the smileys?

Lord of Divine Slaughter
16-04-2011, 07:18
The main draw for me is the pose. I like a good dynamic pose over static ones, GW is getting better at this, and plastic makes conversion easy.

Next thing is realism. I hate the plastic grey knights for their clunky stormbolters etc. I want a model I can believe in.

Scrolls, rhinestones, embossed capes and banners doesn't catch my fancy, but this gaudiness is integral to the universe and 40k wouldn't be 40k without this baroque extravaganza and ritual mysticism, so I wouldn't be without it either:)

The Orange
16-04-2011, 07:34
More detailed I like, more details less so, Bling definitely not.

Also drybrusihing and inks/washes are your friends.

16-04-2011, 07:39
I like cleaner models, GW recently tends to overbling them.

Ace Rimmer
16-04-2011, 09:04
I'd prefer un-ornamented models with the options on sprue to add the details that currently get put on, or failing that, just throw in a strip of green-stuff in the box.

I like armour that actually looks like armour, rather than ornaments with occasional details to remind you there is armour underneath it.

I think that's one of the many reasons I've always loved my Eldar, they mostly look like actual soldiers rather than statues, but even they suffer from excess unnecessary details on many of the models, gem-stones put in random places with no obvious purpose, occasional non-eldar looking pouches/equipment etc...

Less really can be more.

16-04-2011, 09:07
While I love some of the highly detailed figs GW makes, I am only a mediocre painter. I prefer the plain plastic marines as they have larger flatter less ‘cluttered’ painting surfaces. I like the Uber detail for command sqds, but for troops, I like plain for ease of painting. Does anyone else feel this way as well?
Sounds horrible to me. If you'd ask me, each armour-plate on my Eldar could have ornaments carved into them. I'd love that.