Author Topic: New Warhammer Sculpt (Read 8372 times)

jrvk777 · « **Reply #30 on:** 18 March 2017, 13:00:10 »

Very good discussion here, folks! 8)

For me, I just wanted my own Warhammer mini that I saw two years ago at Gencon. ;)

The Battletech Turn based game has 41,733 backers that "know" about Battletech... Could we perhaps add a Lance of the Re-seens (whether plastic or pewter) as one of the "crowdfunded" gear like the steins or coasters?

Just a thought. Happy to hear suggestions on how we can help CGL make Battletech popular again...

Cache · « **Reply #31 on:** 18 March 2017, 13:39:08 »

Quote from: jrvk777 on 18 March 2017, 13:00:10

Could we perhaps add a Lance of the Re-seens (whether plastic or pewter) as one of the "crowdfunded" gear like the steins or coasters?

Not just a nitpick, but also for clarification, "Reseen" is the term given to the 3067-era Project Phoenix upgrades that gave us proxy images for the "Unseen". The new retconned images you're asking about are referred to as "Classics" or "nuSeen".

LeoCeballos · « **Reply #32 on:** 18 March 2017, 13:54:07 »

Quote from: Cache on 18 March 2017, 13:39:08

Not just a nitpick, but also for clarification, "Reseen" is the term given to the 3067-era Project Phoenix upgrades that gave us proxy images for the "Unseen". The new retconned images you're asking about are referred to as "Classics" or "nuSeen".

With maybe a couple of exceptions, I will be proxying the Classics/nuSeen in place of the "Project Phoenix" variants, ASAP :p Starting with the Shadow Hawk I just ordered.

Quote

The only problem is that you chew significantly into your strategic partners best sellers. If that is the portion of IWM's sales that keep them happily making minis for battletech, you shoot yourself in the foot by making molds you most likely will never be able to keep around long enough to make a profit on. This only works when both companies make money.

I understand this, but I think that at the moment Battletech is pretty stagnant. I mean, I don't know what the numbers are for which molds sell how much on IWM, but its not like they're making a ton of money on the Unseen... since they can't make them at all. And every mayor game out there these days makes most of their stuff in plastics.

By limiting the plastics to a certain era/core group of mechs, they can get new players started fast... exactly as they are doing now with the Alpha Strike boxes. IWM can produce the vast variety of mechs that are frankly too many to produce as plastic boxed sets in large volumes (unless you're Games Workshop). The plastics are needed to get new players started and collecting, and then you hit them with cool exotic designs (in metal) once they're serious about the hobby. For example, my current project is to paint a Company with 2 AS boxed sets and 4 metals of rarer mechs I like.

cavingjan · « **Reply #33 on:** 18 March 2017, 14:19:43 »

If you notice, the plastic minis that have been produced for the lance packs haven't been on the top sellers lists for a very long time. I would guess that was by design.

With the exception of the Age of War, any era has too many minis to be all made from plastic due to the start up cost.

One of the things that probably should have been done was a time jump to an era when only omnis exist. That would allow you to make just a few base minis and have variant parts. These could then be done in plastic.

pheonixstorm · « **Reply #34 on:** 20 March 2017, 16:37:45 »

With a large enough mold you can make a ton of minis. Though my idea is a single mold with a block for each mini that can be easily swapped out to make an intro box or lance packs or just an entire stack of mech x. The typical injection mold can be pretty complex if you spend enough on it. If I had the proper equipment I could probably remake the entire intro box, or at the very least a lance pack, for less than 25k. I have seen the injection machines for as little as 10k for a decent sized one. equipment and a blank mold or two may run 5-10k, maybe more.

So maybe it would be better for CGL to invest in IWM to start up their own plastic line rather than find some large unknown company to handle everything. At least then CGL would know they were going to get a quality product from a trustworthy company.

Cache · « **Reply #35 on:** 20 March 2017, 19:05:59 »

Quote from: pheonixstorm on 20 March 2017, 16:37:45

So maybe it would be better for CGL to invest in IWM to start up their own plastic line rather than find some large unknown company to handle everything. At least then CGL would know they were going to get a quality product from a trustworthy company.

That would assume IWM has any interest in plastics. I wouldn't make that assumption.

pheonixstorm · « **Reply #36 on:** 20 March 2017, 20:44:23 »

No, the assumption is that even if they wanted to they don't have the room for the machines considering the size. I believe there is an old post somewhere that it was at least looked into but no mention as to why they didn't.

Wrangler · « **Reply #37 on:** 22 March 2017, 13:49:32 »

Its taking too long to produce the new Classic Warhammer figure and the other figs slated for "plastic first".

I've gotten my Classics from Ironwind has already put out. However, It's been what? Going on two years since the NeoClassics came out, they have yet to put anything out? I understand CGL wants to make New Classics right and make a profit that they sorely needed, but their going kill business if they keep having these unexplained delays.

EDIT: Sorry guys, I was typing bit too fast for my own good to catch the grammar mistakes i made. :-\

Burning Chrome · « **Reply #38 on:** 22 March 2017, 19:43:54 »

Yep...

Reldn · « **Reply #39 on:** 22 March 2017, 21:45:27 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 22 March 2017, 13:49:32

Its taking too long to produce the new Classic Warhammer figure and the other figs slated for "plastic first".

I've gotten my Classics from Ironwind has already put out. However, It's been what? Going on two years since the NeoClassics came out, they have yet to put anything out? I understand CGL wants to make New Classics right and make a profit that they sorely needed, but their going kill business if they keep having these unexplained delays.

EDIT: Sorry guys, I was typing bit too fast for my own good to catch the grammar mistakes i made. :-\

Wholeheartedly agreed. As much as I hate saying it, and I really hope I'm wrong, but, I think our chances of ever seeing any new plastics are pretty much nil at this point.

Hayden. · « **Reply #40 on:** 22 March 2017, 21:49:21 »

On the contrary, I think this must be working well for them... as much as I want the Warhammer and Marauder, their lack of availability has steered me to the new classics that *are* available. Instead of picking up Warhammers and Marauders, I've been picking up Shadowhawks and Wasps (which I probably would have passed over for years, were the aforementioned 'mechs available). I'm just happy to be along for the ride (I do worry about literally dying before I get my hands on a new Marauder).

Wrangler · « **Reply #41 on:** 23 March 2017, 07:42:57 »

Sadly, i think so bad. I know a guy who in my monthly demo game i play with bough a old school Plastech Locust because he could get his hands on ReClassic one. I wish they were able bring in someone dedicated to do certain projects to make sure someone isn't wearing too many hats and not able get stuff going.

StoneRhino · « **Reply #42 on:** 23 March 2017, 09:25:10 »

Its possible that the revised 3025 mechs are low priority considering the current era of the game leaves them in the past, with the reseen between 3025 and 3145. Those that were around for the originals probably have a ton of them, or if they wanted them probably purchased them since they became the unseen. It is likely that those that started after 3050 simply do not care about these mechs. Then we have MWO that has created their own versions of every mech they have added, which has covered a number of those unseens.

The increasing metal mini prices are not likely the favorite thing of any player out there. Not everyone is seeing increases in their ability to purchase unnecessary items such as minis. While BT has always been cheeto and penny counter friendly, people do not stop at the game tables of those using paper counters as readily as they do with a table full of painted minis.

Part of the problem is that the demand for minis is low due to the lack of urging by the devs or the game to buy, buy, buy. Hell, IIRC, the Kurita combat manual suggests that you cannot have more then 1 of a particular model of a mech, which can be an issue if you only prefer a particular variant of a mech. AS helps to increase the number of minis that players feel the urge to purchase though. Doing so helps to increase sales to those that are already fans of the game, thus reducing the need to find new blood to make sales in order to turn a profit. However, the increased costs are going to impact those same players.

If there was a steady supply of starter boxes then I might be able to get someone to buy one. Seeing the boxes being listed at $500 or some other crazy nonsense is not helping. Its not helping becuase not everyone goes to game shops to look for stuff and a $500 intro box is going to scare even a hardcore 40k player off. If there were starter boxes on the shelf I could at least show it to those players that buzz around our game table, and those that are willing to talk for a few minutes. I hate seeing them look around at the walls because I know that they are looking for product that isn't there.

The main issue is not a handful of minis that may not be relevant to those that are new to the game. The issue is getting those box sets rolling out to the shops.

LeoCeballos · « **Reply #43 on:** 23 March 2017, 13:30:09 »

Quote from: StoneRhino on 23 March 2017, 09:25:10

Then we have MWO that has created their own versions of every mech they have added, which has covered a number of those unseens.

I think those reseens deliberately look more like the MWO versions; the Warhammer and the Marauder in particular. Same thing with the Stalker II looking a LOT like the MWO Stalker. I think there is definitely an intent to capitalize on MWO, MW5, and the new upciming BTech game. If there isn't, there definitely should be.

SteelRaven · « **Reply #44 on:** 23 March 2017, 13:55:10 »

Quote from: LeoCeballos on 23 March 2017, 13:30:09

I think those reseens deliberately look more like the MWO versions; the Warhammer and the Marauder in particular....

As a artist and a fan of the original designs, the only way the two look alike is they still resemble the Macross inspirations. The Warhammer has totally different arms, cockpit and chest, the Marauders cockpit and dorsal gun are closer to the Phoenix look. Someone made a line up of the Tomahawk, Classic and MWO warhammer to line up the weapon placement. Can't find it but I'll post a link if I do.

IAMCLANWOLF · « **Reply #45 on:** 23 March 2017, 14:00:42 »

Quote from: LeoCeballos on 23 March 2017, 13:30:09

I think those reseens deliberately look more like the MWO versions; the Warhammer and the Marauder in particular. Same thing with the Stalker II looking a LOT like the MWO Stalker.

Well, technically... The MWO Marauder was based on the original ShimmeringSword (aka Anthony Scroggins) design. The original ShimmeringSword design was modified to be the new classic BT MAD. So, in a way the classic BT design came first. As for the Warhammer-- I don't follow you. To my eye they look quite dissimilar...

To further confuse the issue; Anthony Scroggins and Alex Iglesias (MWO concept artist) have a similar style approach. Also, while Anthony provided the artwork for almost all of the new classic lineup. Alex tackled the new classic Battlemaster.

Quote from: LeoCeballos on 23 March 2017, 13:30:09

I think there is definitely an intent to capitalize on MWO, MW5, and the new upciming BTech game. If there isn't, there definitely should be.

There is certainly always an attempt to rope-in new players from video game releases. Sure. However, "capitalize on" somehow seems to suggest the wrong intent. And, again BT employed both of the above artists first. <shrug>

LeoCeballos · « **Reply #46 on:** 23 March 2017, 15:37:36 »

Quote from: IAMCLANWOLF on 23 March 2017, 14:00:42

There is certainly always an attempt to rope-in new players from video game releases. Sure. However, "capitalize on" somehow seems to suggest the wrong intent. And, again BT employed both of the above artists first. <shrug>

I didn't mean to imply there was any sort of "intent" beyond making/keeping Battletech popular, profitable, and expanding the hobby. ANY effort made to keep the brand unified despite the fragmented rights is a GOOD thing. You're telling me its more accidental, and that if anything it was PGI's good move to hire a former Battletech artist (Alex); well then props to them. Whatever you may think of the phrase "capitalized on" its way better than "failed to capitalize on". As in: wasted opportunity. As "keepers" of the Battletech tabletop game, they would not be doing their jobs right if they ignored the chance to draw new players in.

Quote

As a artist and a fan of the original designs, the only way the two look alike is they still resemble the Macross inspirations. The Warhammer has totally different arms, cockpit and chest, the Marauders cockpit and dorsal gun are closer to the Phoenix look. Someone made a line up of the Tomahawk, Classic and MWO warhammer to line up the weapon placement. Can't find it but I'll post a link if I do.

As another artist and fan of the original designs since Robotech, I have to disagree. The resemblance might be accidental, but both designs de-emphasize the Tomahawk's "hump" and make the torso a bit shallower front-to-back than the Destroid. They both also end up beefing up the upper arms a bit. The cockpit is in general closer to the top of the mech and more recessed than the original (in the case of the MWO one maybe that is just the removal of the hump). I also feel like in general the style of the detailing is similar; that is more I think due to mech rendering having moved in a certain direction in general, but still adds to the feel of similarity; less curves and more angular facets, for example. A BIG difference, of course, is that the MWO mech does away with the shoulder "pauldrons" entirely, where the "Classics" design emphasizes them a great deal, which I admit does lead to a fairly different silhouette from certain angles.

SteelRaven · « **Reply #47 on:** 23 March 2017, 16:20:04 »

I didn't say there are not similarities, both are try to get the aesthetics of the original Tomahawk without copying the design. If you want something more original, here you go:

LeoCeballos · « **Reply #48 on:** 23 March 2017, 17:37:21 »

Quote from: SteelRaven on 23 March 2017, 16:20:04

I didn't say there are not similarities, both are try to get the aesthetics of the original Tomahawk without copying the design. If you want something more original, here you go:

Why on Earth would I want something "more original" for the Warhammer? Both the MWO and especially the Classics versions of the Warhammer are fantastic! I've been going on about the Classics like the are the best thing since sliced bread, why would I want the Reseen? Both MWO and the Classics are fantastic updates of the Tomahawk/Unseen design, and I feel like they took a similar approach with the update, and that is a very good thing, intentional or not.

SteelRaven · « **Reply #49 on:** 23 March 2017, 19:23:33 »

Quote from: LeoCeballos on 23 March 2017, 17:37:21

Why on Earth would I want something "more original" for the Warhammer? Both the MWO and especially the Classics versions of the Warhammer are fantastic! I've been going on about the Classics like the are the best thing since sliced bread, why would I want the Reseen? Both MWO and the Classics are fantastic updates of the Tomahawk/Unseen design, and I feel like they took a similar approach with the update, and that is a very good thing, intentional or not.

Sorry, I misread the tone of your post. I guess the number of hyper critical post regarding new art has left me defensive regarding the designs I actually like.

Also, couldn't find the original post with the comparison shot but I had pic on my PC.
http://68.media.tumblr.com/6d300a85d8f416f4246e62823457f9d5/tumblr_onaex3ZKWx1rbt69ao1_1280.jpg

LeoCeballos · « **Reply #50 on:** 23 March 2017, 22:22:24 »

Quote from: SteelRaven on 23 March 2017, 19:23:33

Sorry, I misread the tone of your post. I guess the number of hyper critical post regarding new art has left me defensive regarding the designs I actually like.

Also, couldn't find the original post with the comparison shot but I had pic on my PC.
http://68.media.tumblr.com/6d300a85d8f416f4246e62823457f9d5/tumblr_onaex3ZKWx1rbt69ao1_1280.jpg

That's a cool pic. I actually think it illustrates my point about proportions. Regardless, I love all three of those. I actually think the Classics Warhammer is closer to the Unseen than the MWO one, other than the big shoulders, which I don't dislike.

But I'm surprised to hear that you've come across negative feelings about the "Classics" versions. Most reactions I've seen have been very positive, especially compared to Project Phoenix! The only negative thing I've heard is, well, the reason for this thread... we want the minis already, stop teasing us! :p

I actually just got my Classics Shadow Hawk and its fantastic. Can't wait to get working on it!

SteelRaven · « **Reply #51 on:** 23 March 2017, 23:08:49 »

People are emotionally invested in the original designs, (I wasn't above saying a few stupid things in the past) and arguments over aesthetics never go away. Most 'meh' comments disappeared after everyone got a look at the prototype minis but considering there is still a clique who are hostel towards MWO athletics, I always get the impression the MWO=Classics has some sort of negative connotation attached.

pheonixstorm · « **Reply #52 on:** 24 March 2017, 01:28:52 »

I think of the MWO designs as better designs (art wise) of the project phoenix work rather than staying true to the Macross designs. CGL classic designs follow more closely to the Macross design IMO.

To me the MWO Warhammer and Marauder are the least like the original Macross design. The Archer OTOH actually does a much better job of it.

As for those who think these won't make it into plastic.. Why? We currently have no intro box so they have to do something to replace it and Randall has already mentioned that the classics are what is intended to do so. As I have pried from Speck IWM is only able to (currently) produce 12 classic designs in metal at the moment. So we know there shouldn't be any overlap, or at least not much. We still haven't heard about a lot of the other designs which will include new versions of the Scorpion and Goliath mechs. Both of which I suspect will be in metal since doing a solid plastic cast would be problematic.

I do agree annoyingly and strongly that the role out of the new classics designs is taking far too long for any of us. I just really really hope CGL has a new intro box ready to go by GenCon at the earliest or christmas at the latest but who knows... I'm still annoyed I'm not playing the BattleTech beta right now as well...

mdauben · « **Reply #53 on:** 30 March 2017, 15:32:48 »

Quote from: pheonixstorm on 24 March 2017, 01:28:52

I do agree annoyingly and strongly that the role out of the new classics designs is taking far too long for any of us. I just really really hope CGL has a new intro box ready to go by GenCon at the earliest or christmas at the latest but who knows... I'm still annoyed I'm not playing the BattleTech beta right now as well...

I'm a fairly patient person but I still have to agree. I think much of the initial "buzz" generated by the first releases of nuSeen artwork has fizzled due to the unexpectedly long delay in actually getting them in production. I know these things can take time, and sometimes delays are out of their hands, but the long delay without any indication of much if any progress kind of kills my enthusiasm. :(

LeoCeballos · « **Reply #54 on:** 30 March 2017, 15:38:19 »

Heheh I just caved in and got a Hammerhands in the meantime. Much nicer design than the Reseen 'hammy in my opinion.