PDA

View Full Version : Question about Games Workshop and it's Tanks.



bloodforminis
21-04-2007, 17:21
Well it seems that a lot of 40k players (me included!) are eagerly awaiting the release of a plastic Baneblade. This project has taken GW a long time they say because of the size of the model, and the technology that goes into it. They say that size is a problem with a lot of models that sound cool but aren't made in plastic (like say Scout Titans, Ork Gargants, super heavies and the like). The things that are either left to Forgeworld, or the initiative of somebody to scratch build one. But yet it seems that whenever I go to any place that sells models, all I see are large size plastic tanks, larger than Baneblades, and with enough mass to surely equal the size of a Warhound or Gargant. Why is it that GW simply cannot make larger models? Is it just so expensive as to be not worth it? I'm really just curious and if somebody could provide a sound explanation that would be apreciated.

Destris
21-04-2007, 17:32
Firstly, not sure this belongs here.

Secondly, although I'm sure I will be slated for this, the basic reason is that the GW tank needs more and "deeper" detail. The fact that it is also a computerised scan also caused major problems.

D.

Doomclaw
21-04-2007, 17:56
Well, many model tank kits are both bigger and more detailed than gw tanks, however, they are made from quite differen materials which are harder to cut and they break much easier, making them unsuitable to be transported.

Coasty
21-04-2007, 18:18
GW tanks are very short on detail compared to your average Tamiya beasty and what they have is very chunky and made from thick, sturdy plastic; they should be fine.

Agamemnon2
21-04-2007, 18:30
I don't think anyone has got it completely right so far. The average 1/35 tank is larger than a GW tank, and has much finer detail and lots more of it. They're usually more fragile than GW tanks because they're trying to replicate something that worked in real life, as opposed to being designed from the top down with playability in mind.

The plastic used is often slightly different from GW plastic, being harder and able to hold detail better (it's not much harder to cut, you notice the difference but it doesn't affect the actual work). Materials-wise, it is not significantly weaker, although many parts are, since they're trying to replicate things in scale, such as thin gun shields, fine grab handles or thin steel fenders. Scale models could be made gamer-proof, but aside from some 1/72 stuff, there is no call for it, so manufacturers push for greater realism at expense of transportability. But if someone wanted to do a Baneblade-sized Königstiger that'd be durable enough to be handled and transported in a simple foam case, they could. It's just that nobody wants one.

The real reasons companies like Tamiya and Dragon can do bigger kits whereas GW cannot has, I feel, more to do with economic factors than inability to achieve sufficient detail or durability. It might very well be that going bigger is a risk that's too large for GW to take due to their current manufacturing methods being better suited for smaller parts, or the risk of investing heavily on what will be a low-profit product.

Regimental
21-04-2007, 18:36
Rightly said Agamemnon2....

The cost for cutting and making a mold for GW is far more costly than for any of the dedicated kit makers. Their volume compared to GW's is HUGE. That said, it was only ontil very recently that GW began doing their casting inhouse (in big quanities). So that was also a factor. It all has to do with cost and practicality at the end of the day.

My two cents.

Reg!

ancient_conflict
21-04-2007, 23:55
theres also the whole design aspect GW have to work with designs based on a few STC's or develop a new one

other manufacturers have nice prexisting designs to work from so a lot of the desgin costs are missed out

also you pay part for the fluff and design aspect of the hobby as well as well as the hobby centers etc

RavenMorpheus
22-04-2007, 00:02
I think its already been said but basically there are far more "modellers" out there who make and paint tank kits revell, airfix, tamiya to name but a few and as such those models are not used in gaming, if GW were to make display pieces then they'd be able to do more plastic kits, but the cost of doing so is prohibitive because they simply wouldn't sell enough of them IMO.

The technology is there, they can do Landraiders and such so they could do larger kits such as the Baneblade in plastic but they won't have the level of detail of such kits as tamiya and airfix because of the need for the models to be sold in large quantities, and display pieces generally aren't made in large quantities.

wingedserpant
22-04-2007, 02:45
I don't think anyone has got it completely right so far. The average 1/35 tank is larger than a GW tank, and has much finer detail and lots more of it. They're usually more fragile than GW tanks because they're trying to replicate something that worked in real life, as opposed to being designed from the top down with playability in mind.

The plastic used is often slightly different from GW plastic, being harder and able to hold detail better (it's not much harder to cut, you notice the difference but it doesn't affect the actual work). Materials-wise, it is not significantly weaker, although many parts are, since they're trying to replicate things in scale, such as thin gun shields, fine grab handles or thin steel fenders. Scale models could be made gamer-proof, but aside from some 1/72 stuff, there is no call for it, so manufacturers push for greater realism at expense of transportability. But if someone wanted to do a Baneblade-sized Königstiger that'd be durable enough to be handled and transported in a simple foam case, they could. It's just that nobody wants one.

The real reasons companies like Tamiya and Dragon can do bigger kits whereas GW cannot has, I feel, more to do with economic factors than inability to achieve sufficient detail or durability. It might very well be that going bigger is a risk that's too large for GW to take due to their current manufacturing methods being better suited for smaller parts, or the risk of investing heavily on what will be a low-profit product.

I agree. GW is a company after all and when you get really high up is just run by accountants and the like. While most of the developers would want a kit like this-the risk would stop them.

Plus i love your sig.

Rhamag
22-04-2007, 03:39
Makes me wonder if the delays on the ork modular vehicle kit are just a convenient excuse to postpone doing the ork codex to sell more power-armoured models, or if GW really are pushing their modelling & production boundaries and the Baneblade and Ork vehicle kit will be worth the wait. I do really hope it's the latter. Self-confessed Fanboy since 1990.

Agamemnon2
22-04-2007, 08:47
other manufacturers have nice prexisting designs to work from so a lot of the desgin costs are missed out

Don't underestimate the complexity of the design process when it comes to turning a real-world tank into a 900-piece plastic kit, though. The amount of CAD and twiddling it takes to make it work is massive, especially since most prototype vehicles are extensively documented so any deviation will be noticed and pounced upon by nitpickers. Making a simple GW kit from scratch (and every GW plastic kit would be considered simple by them) would be considered child's play in comparison.

jc5515
22-04-2007, 12:42
I agree the fact of the matter is that gamesworkshop have to non stop produce these minatures for people gaming intensity and whilst doing this find the effort and the time to create new ones.

Codsticker
22-04-2007, 17:08
I don't understand the push for the plastic Baneblade myself; as it's usefullness in games will be severley limited, they must be counting on thousands of "hobbyists" buying it just because it's "sooo kooool". Is there really that many people out there who will be buying, what will probably be a $100 model, simply for that?

Colonel Deal
22-04-2007, 17:44
From what I've heard a large number of IG players want plastic baneblades because they cannot afford the FW ones. So I'd say there will be enough people buying the kit. I'll certainly be buying one, if not more.

Bloodknight
22-04-2007, 17:53
One is mine, too. And yes, I count on it that I cannot use it most of the time. It´s just that I have everything I need for my Guard so now the rule of cool dictates me to buy one;)

Coogaar
22-04-2007, 18:38
The Baneblade is the epitome of tank for guard players... our armor is supposed to be our strength, but under the current vehicle damage rules, our strength is a little limited. Still a strength, but our tanks don't feel quite as unstoppable as they should be. The Baneblade, on the other hand, is the true juggernaut of IG vehicles. It fits exactly in to that niche we all are craving so badly: unstoppable and armed to the teeth.

On another note about the newfound popularity of the Baneblade, I have three words for you: Dawn of War.

Rhamag
23-04-2007, 03:46
The plastic Baneblade will also be the Konvertor's Tank of Choice, for us Orky types...

Khorne warrior
23-04-2007, 04:03
>>GW might also (just speculating here) want to make sure that people will buy the Baneblade before making it their top priorety

Dribble Joy
23-04-2007, 05:22
Big kits don't sell as much as smaller ones, for various reasons, this is turn pushes the price up in order for them to break even in the long run, let alone make a profit. They're also a less stable form of income, it's not like several hundred/thousand are being sold daily.
In all, the effort required, be it finantial or man-hours, isn't worth it really.
If they were utter buggars, they wouldn't do it at all and FW wouldn't even exist, so it's all a bit half way as it is.

bloodforminis
23-04-2007, 20:19
I don't think anyone has got it completely right so far. The average 1/35 tank is larger than a GW tank, and has much finer detail and lots more of it. They're usually more fragile than GW tanks because they're trying to replicate something that worked in real life, as opposed to being designed from the top down with playability in mind.

The plastic used is often slightly different from GW plastic, being harder and able to hold detail better (it's not much harder to cut, you notice the difference but it doesn't affect the actual work). Materials-wise, it is not significantly weaker, although many parts are, since they're trying to replicate things in scale, such as thin gun shields, fine grab handles or thin steel fenders. Scale models could be made gamer-proof, but aside from some 1/72 stuff, there is no call for it, so manufacturers push for greater realism at expense of transportability. But if someone wanted to do a Baneblade-sized Königstiger that'd be durable enough to be handled and transported in a simple foam case, they could. It's just that nobody wants one.

The real reasons companies like Tamiya and Dragon can do bigger kits whereas GW cannot has, I feel, more to do with economic factors than inability to achieve sufficient detail or durability. It might very well be that going bigger is a risk that's too large for GW to take due to their current manufacturing methods being better suited for smaller parts, or the risk of investing heavily on what will be a low-profit product.

Alright, yeah. That's the kind of answer I was looking for. Thanks. It's sort of what I was concluding, that there are more people who would do model tanks as apposed to GW gamers. Makes sense. Thanks everyone!

Karhedron
23-04-2007, 20:35
That said, it was only ontil very recently that GW began doing their casting inhouse (in big quanities).

GW have always done all their casting (metal, plastic and FW resin) inhouse. They have neevr outsourced any of their manufacturing. One of the comments they have made in the past about prices is that they could outsource production to somewhere like China and probably lower prices but they don't want to do this due the difficulty of having their designers several thousand miles from the production centre.

Templar Ben
23-04-2007, 21:20
The Baneblade is the epitome of tank for guard players... our armor is supposed to be our strength, but under the current vehicle damage rules, our strength is a little limited. Still a strength, but our tanks don't feel quite as unstoppable as they should be. The Baneblade, on the other hand, is the true juggernaut of IG vehicles. It fits exactly in to that niche we all are craving so badly: unstoppable and armed to the teeth.

On another note about the newfound popularity of the Baneblade, I have three words for you: Dawn of War.

Dawn of War keeps me from hating Orks. I truly love what that game has done as far as introducing 40K to a new generation.


I agree the fact of the matter is that gamesworkshop have to non stop produce these minatures for people gaming intensity and whilst doing this find the effort and the time to create new ones.

Couple of points though. First, the line doesn't run 24/7 so they are definatly not working nonstop. Second, the crew that runs the machines is not the same as the ones that design the dies.

Lord Commander Eidolon
24-09-2007, 19:56
i think this thread has kind of changed direction, the fact a plastic baneblade is comin out is good, although the baneblade battlecannon is crappy compared to forgeworlds,anyway im more bothered about forgeworlds conversion kits for the baneblade........shadowsword anyone :D

Gwedd
24-09-2007, 20:26
Comrades,

Producing plastic kits comes down to the finances. The final cost of the item has to reflect how many they henestly believe they can sell in order to recoup costs, and those costs can be pretty large.

It starts with the design team having to finalize the model. This is then broken down into it's component parts and each and every single part has to be rendered with CAD to exacting details. After that, the components are then arranged into their respective groups by casting sprue. These also will have to maintain an overall dimension in order to fit within the mold maximum size for whatever machine they are using. This entire process takes awhile, and all the time the designers and drafters are getting paid. That can add up to quite a bit.

Then, the data for the molds is fed into a milling machine that cuts the mold(s). This master mold is also checked for tolerance against the data. Finally, production can commence.

Now, the process from conception to design through mold-making can run $100,000 or more depending upon many factors. Now you need to add in the cost of the plastic (bought in huge quantities) and the folks who operate the molding machines (more salary) plus those who examine and sort the sprues, packaging (designing the cover art, printin costs, etc) and parking the inventory in the warehouse until it ships. That adds more costs. A total of $150,00 minimum to produce a single kit is not at all out of line, especially since GW is a smaller company than many of the larger corporations like Tamiya, Revell, Airfix, etc. Those larger companies have much more capital to work with, but GW needs to do some serious research on each product before they go into production, in order to maintain it's profitability.

Now, just taking for example the figure of $150,000 to produce a new plastic kit, that means you need to sell 1500 of them @ $100.00 each just to recover your initial costs. That is BEFORE a single penny of profit is seen.

So, when conversing about how long it takes to get plastic kits, etc, keep in mind both the lead time for design and the costs. It isn't cheap, and none of the stuff I listed above includes the actual cost of the molding machine itself, or the maintainance required for it either. True, the same machine can be used for many years for different models, but it still is an expensive peice of machinery that bites into a company's bottom line.

Respects,

ChaosMaster
28-09-2007, 02:48
many model tank kits are both bigger and more detailed than gw tanks, however, they are made from quite differen materials

Please pardon me, but I don't think this is correct. GW plastic models are polystyrene, just like kits from Revell, Tamiya, Testors, etc. and one can use the same polystyrene cement ("plastic cement") to assemble them. I have also wondered why GW has stated that they are just now able to make a model as large as the Baneblade when other plastic tank, airplane, etc. makers have been doing it for years. It's one of the Universe's great mysteries apparently!

Joewrightgm
28-09-2007, 03:10
I'd like to think that the look of the new Baneblade is the direction GW is taking for all they're Guard tanks; big, crude, industrial, etc. I'd like to see this design paradigm carried into possible re-cuts of the Leman Russ/Demolisher.

And since there's been rumbling about there not being enough Baneblades for launch is a good sign (both for players and the company accountants)

Gwedd
28-09-2007, 03:22
Please pardon me, but I don't think this is correct. GW plastic models are polystyrene, just like kits from Revell, Tamiya, Testors, etc. and one can use the same polystyrene cement ("plastic cement") to assemble them. I have also wondered why GW has stated that they are just now able to make a model as large as the Baneblade when other plastic tank, airplane, etc. makers have been doing it for years. It's one of the Universe's great mysteries apparently!

yeah, the plastic is the same, however it seems that GW might be using more of it, as in thicker parts, than the normal plastic kits do. The only reason I can think of for GW not doing larger plastic kits until now was that they either didn't have the funds up front to do the molds, or they needed a larger machine and/or adapter plates to use the larger molds. Remember that GW is nowhere near as large a company as many folks think it is.

I also agree with you about using liquid plastic cement to assemble their plastic kits. It may take longer to dry, but it gives a MUCH better bond than any of the cyanoacrylates do.

respects,

ChaosMaster
28-09-2007, 03:36
By the way, the mailing date for the Gamer's Edition Backpack as well as Direct Only Apocalypse deals is Oct. 3 in the US so that customers will have it before the big in-store launch of the Baneblade on Oct. 13. There is a coupon in the Gamer's Edition for $5 off each Baneblade you buy the weekend of Oct. 13!

scarvet
28-09-2007, 03:48
As far as I know, different manufacturers use a different formula polystyrene, as materials' property can be alter by its impurities. And we can all see GW adopted a deeper colour plastic in their new kit with deeper detail.

ChaosMaster
28-09-2007, 03:56
Regarding color, note that polystyrene can be made in almost any color one likes. For those of us who have put together non-GW plastic cars, airplanes, or other kits from other plastic model manufacturers, one knows that they often make the sprues in colors that are convenient for people who can't or don't paint. For example, plastic models of Navy airplanes coming in blue plastic while the little rockets or bombs that come in the kit are often molded in a different color like black.

Even GW has done this at times, as with the old movement trays being green plastic or the Imperial Guard tank track sprue being made in black years ago, the same one that comes in grey nowadays. GW also has made pink/purple plastic Genestealers, dark blue Genestealer/Terminator sprues, and beige Space Marines and Tyranids. Coloring is easily altered when manufacturing polystyrene, so I wouldn't necessarily see any implications regarding quality just because GW kits now use a darker grey than in the recent past.

chromedog
28-09-2007, 03:57
GW have always done all their casting (metal, plastic and FW resin) inhouse. They have never outsourced any of their manufacturing.

Actually, the original plastics (land raider and rhino) were outsourced. They were done by the same people who did the plastic inserts for matchbox (tm) cars - this was stated in an old WD.

I'm not a fan of the current plastic they are using, though. Different areas (of the same thickness) of the same cast piece exhibit different hardnesses. Some parts can be cut easily while others simply break along a fault. Also the different tonal ranges on the same piece of sprue indicates an uneven cooling - so either GW are using an inferior and dodgy grade of styrene or their presses are not uniformly heating the material / they are not allowing enough downtime for the sprues to cool properly before ejection.

Gwedd
28-09-2007, 07:12
Actually, the original plastics (land raider and rhino) were outsourced. They were done by the same people who did the plastic inserts for matchbox (tm) cars - this was stated in an old WD.

I'm not a fan of the current plastic they are using, though. Different areas (of the same thickness) of the same cast piece exhibit different hardnesses. Some parts can be cut easily while others simply break along a fault. Also the different tonal ranges on the same piece of sprue indicates an uneven cooling - so either GW are using an inferior and dodgy grade of styrene or their presses are not uniformly heating the material / they are not allowing enough downtime for the sprues to cool properly before ejection.

I would offer that the faults are easily attributed to operator error, rather than the plastic itself. You are quite correct regarding cooling, etc. The plastic itself comes in pellets that must be melted and fed into the machine. If the operators are not paying attention to the temps of the feeds and the molds, they (and do) cause warpage and variable quality. This can often happen with white metal castings as well. Folks who try to hurry production without allowing for the proper temperatures of the mold and the casting metal run the risk of deformed castings, brittle castings, poor finish, and even mottled finishes.

Putty
28-09-2007, 08:15
IMHO, model kits made by Tamiya and Dragon always have been limited runs and even so, they keep cranking out new model kits monthly. And their stuff are alot cheaper than GW stuff. A Dragon 1/35 scale German WWII 88mm Flak 36 with crew, comes with highly detailed 589 moulded plastic parts AND brass parts AND etched plates. The price? Only $35.

and its a limited run, meaning that it has high collector value and would push the price even higher up when it goes OOP.

Compared to lets say a Rhino. Pretty much unlimited run, only has about 30-40 parts, scale unknown also (probably 1/30) and it goes for $30.

Model making is fundamentally the same, the whole problem is WHERE IT IS MADE. Dragon manufactures it kits in China. GW makes their stuff in UK (and in US right?), high production costs means expensive products. Its as simple as that. No need to confuse yourself with things like method of making blah blah blah.

If GW would to make their kits in China, Thailand, Malaysia, South America or Indonesia, we all would see cheaper stuff (but unlikely they will mark the price of their products down ANYWAYS) and an increase in profit on their part.

The primary problem that I feel is preventing GW from exploiting cheaper production costs in aforementioned countries is the lack of IP safety. And WE know they are so anal about that.

Hence, their lost, is our lost and is their gain.

WLBjork
28-09-2007, 08:35
GW kit is (roughly) 1:65 (28mm high model soldiers representing 72" high soldiers).

It's accepted that most of the model companies will do a run of a few thousand from a mould, then leave it. Quite often they come back to it, update it slightly and release it again, whereas GW seem to use their moulds until they need replacing.

Oh, and don't forget that moving production to China helped one company to go down the drain - they passed the manufacturers the 3-ups to make the mould from and wound up getting models the same size as the 3-ups. I'm prepared to pay the extra for the improved QC.

Jan Polder
28-09-2007, 09:15
On the limited run from Tamiya. It is possible to use different mould materials if you plan to do a limited run.

Depending on the material of the moulds the costs are brought down significantly.

Cheers,

Max

Agamemnon2
28-09-2007, 10:21
Tamiya kits aren't limited-runs. There are several that have been produced sporadically over the period of decades, so I believe their molds are reasonably durable.

Captain Micha
28-09-2007, 12:50
I've dropped my tamiya t 72 five times now and have only had one breakage. I -look- at my necron monolith funny and pieces break off. Don't sell me that durability line *and no my glue skills are not bad.. the monolith's design simply sucks... * My tau devil fish has had pieces *like the engine mounts* break off. Don't get me started on those landing feet.....

No it's not durability. It's called gw is lazy and unwilling to invest in the technology. Which is why they are slowly losing business. Nor is it a question of where it is made most of my model cars and planes are made in the usa. have far more detail and are still cheaper by quite a large margin.

It's not a matter of detail either. Considering that many of my car models even have well cast camshafts.... ******* camshafts man. And they look like camshafts!

They are the same material. I use non gw product whenever possible -especially- on hobby supply as it is much cheaper and usually better quality stuff. My said t 72 had an etched radiator which is far more detailed than any Forgeworld piece produced all by it's lonesome. In short gw just likes ripping us off really.

To make money, you first have to spend it.

RexTalon
28-09-2007, 16:17
...all I see are large size plastic tanks, larger than Baneblades, and with enough mass to surely equal the size of a Warhound or Gargant. Why is it that GW simply cannot make larger models? Is it just so expensive as to be not worth it? I'm really just curious and if somebody could provide a sound explanation that would be apreciated.
I recently asked this same question and was told the following...

"The machine that GW uses to produce plastic models can print out a certain number of plastic frames in one shot. It wouldn't be cost effective to have to change the mold in order to produce the rest of the model, so if a model takes more than 14 individual sprues, then it's not worth it.
The new Gargant, for instance, couldn't be squeezed down past 15 sprues, so they aren't going to produce them."

I hope this answers your question.

ChaosMaster
28-09-2007, 16:19
Sounds like GW needs a visit to the Testors or Revell factory to see how it's done there. Maybe they'd learn a few new tricks.

Grazzy
28-09-2007, 16:57
Looks like economic factors are most important. What we need to do is organise a massive petition for gargants, then titans, then valkyries etc... so that GW know there is a large demand like there was for the baneblade.

ChaosMaster
28-09-2007, 17:03
If the Baneblade sells well enough, that will speak louder than letters or petitions. Buy the products that support the kind of releases you want to see and that will hopefully generate production of more products like it. I'm doing my part, I really like this whole Apocalypse thing. I'm planning to pick up my Baneblades right after midnight during the Oct. 12-13 release event.

Gwedd
28-09-2007, 17:33
IMHO, model kits made by Tamiya and Dragon always have been limited runs and even so, they keep cranking out new model kits monthly. And their stuff are alot cheaper than GW stuff. A Dragon 1/35 scale German WWII 88mm Flak 36 with crew, comes with highly detailed 589 moulded plastic parts AND brass parts AND etched plates. The price? Only $35.

and its a limited run, meaning that it has high collector value and would push the price even higher up when it goes OOP.

Compared to lets say a Rhino. Pretty much unlimited run, only has about 30-40 parts, scale unknown also (probably 1/30) and it goes for $30.

Model making is fundamentally the same, the whole problem is WHERE IT IS MADE. Dragon manufactures it kits in China. GW makes their stuff in UK (and in US right?), high production costs means expensive products. Its as simple as that. No need to confuse yourself with things like method of making blah blah blah.

If GW would to make their kits in China, Thailand, Malaysia, South America or Indonesia, we all would see cheaper stuff (but unlikely they will mark the price of their products down ANYWAYS) and an increase in profit on their part.

The primary problem that I feel is preventing GW from exploiting cheaper production costs in aforementioned countries is the lack of IP safety. And WE know they are so anal about that.

Hence, their lost, is our lost and is their gain.


Comrade,

These are limited run kits only if you consider a run of 500,000 to 1,000,000 kits a limited run. Tamiya is one of, if not THE, largest plastic model kit makers in the world. It out-produces GW on a scale of thousands to one. In fact, GW is NOT even close to being the largest wargaming company. If folks think that the GW gamesday events are bid, they ought to attend Historicon, or Origins, or any of the wargaming conventions. there you will see an entire hall of nothing but manufacturers displaying and selling their wares. massive gaming areas and bring&buy& swap areas.

I said in an earlier post the GW was limited by their mold and machine sizes. They could easily match other companies if they were willing to invest in the equipment and staff to do so. However, in the world of wargaminf, and especially plastic kits, GW is still closer to a mom&pop operation.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that. Nothing at all. However, without the capital to invest in new machinery and staff, it's hard to shorten the time periods for releasing new items, and it's also hard to reduce prices when you have a very limited amount of sales expected. You actually DO need to squeeze every last penny of profit out of every sale.

Respects,

Sovereign
28-09-2007, 18:53
What we need to do is organise a massive petition for gargants, then titans, then valkyries etc... so that GW know there is a large demand like there was for the baneblade.
I will be getting a Baneblade, so that's goodness and light for GW.

However, I have ZERO interest in Gargants - I'm not an Ork player, and never will be. So as far as I'm concerned, any GW "investment" in Ork Gargants is money down the toilet.

Titans? I see the new Reaver Titan, and think it's looks clumsy and stupid. So that's time and effort wasted, because I won't buy it.

OTOH, if GW made a new (plastic) Phantom Titan, I'd be interested. But that isn't likely anytime soon.

Valkyries? If they had official rules within the IG Codex as Non-Dedicated (i.e. Scoring) Fast Attack Transports *and* plastic ($50), I'd consider them. But As I have 2 Hellhounds, I'd only buy one.

So out of the 3 that you mention, GW would sell only one model. Looks like GW needs to wait for more demand to build up.

Sovereign
28-09-2007, 18:57
I also agree with you about using liquid plastic cement to assemble their plastic kits. It may take longer to dry, but it gives a MUCH better bond than any of the cyanoacrylates do.
While MEK ("liquid cement") bonds plastic better than CA ("super glue"), you really should be using Testors gel (in the red tube). This gives the absolute strongest joints possible.

carlisimo
28-09-2007, 19:46
I was (and am) a scale modeler before a 40k guy. It's a surprisingly big hobby, with massive sales compared to GW products - especially in Asia. It's totally true that GW is closer to a mom & pop operation in that world.

There are definitely materials differences. The polystyrene used for model kits cannot be cast in thick sections like that of a Space Marine's arm or a bolter. They tend to be harder and more brittle - for example if you try to bend a sprue frame it'll snap, whereas Citadel sprue frames bend. That softness is great for our hobby, and unnecessary with model airplanes and cars. (I must disclose that I've never bought 1:35 scale troop figures.)

The economics also influence the mold. There's a huge difference in quality between Revell/Tamiya/Hasegawa and the short-run guys out there (of course, the really short-run guys use resin and/or vacform). The prices aren't all that great either. 10 years ago I spent $70 on a 1:35 Tamiya tank similar in size to a Baneblade model; I've also bought Tamiya car models in the $35 range that were in no way better than a Rhino. Those were popular models too, that would cost much more if sold at GW volumes.

Trumpeter, a Chinese company, has come out with huge kits at good prices (for the size) in the last few years. Maybe GW isn't big enough to go there for production though. Could be some politics involved there, understandably.

Gwedd
28-09-2007, 21:26
Carlisimo,

I am a big fan of trumpeter models. I've been rather impressed with both their quality and choice of subjects.

I too am a modeller first and a gamer second. That doesn't mean I don't take the game seriously. I do. I just put the modelling part first. You are correct about the differences in styrene between the various companies. It's the same plastic, but the ingrediant ratios are different, leading to the "softness" of GW's plastic compared to other companies.

Respects,