Return of the Opinions/feedback on IWM sculpts

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Just got one of the new Phoenix Hawk sculpts and put it together, and I have to say that I absolutely love that there's a direction indicator for the hips.

[Crackerb0x]

Just got one of the new Phoenix Hawk sculpts and put it together, and I have to say that I absolutely love that there's a direction indicator for the hips.

I'm really glad to see people appreciating this feature that I began to include on any model I part for IWM. My belief is that it shouldn't be necessary to reference art to properly assemble a model and that that can be done without compromising on engineering for more premium features like poseability.

[Crackerb0x]

I also want to take a moment here to talk about part count since that seems to be something that routinely seems to make people annoyed or irritated. It shouldn't be the only thing accounted for when evaluating models, because a high part count model can be engineered in such a way that its easy to assemble and not fall apart. I have not been shying away from making high part-count models like the Savage Wolf because I am confident I can (and will continue to) achieve this.

Doing things like providing solid connection points that are keyed (and the keys can be removed if people want for additional poses) or providing built-in pins when connections are suspect have been something I've been trying to include whenever possible.

I've made a point of leveraging my first-hand hobby experience of assembling hundreds of these crazy things and then still needing to store/transport/paint these to certain standards to help guide my process.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

I'm really glad to see people appreciating this feature that I began to include on any model I part for IWM. My belief is that it shouldn't be necessary to reference art to properly assemble a model and that that can be done without compromising on engineering for more premium features like poseability.

Thank you, it's a wonderful inclusion.

[worktroll]

I also want to take a moment here to talk about part count since that seems to be something that routinely seems to make people annoyed or irritated. It shouldn't be the only thing accounted for when evaluating models, because a high part count model can be engineered in such a way that its easy to assemble and not fall apart. I have not been shying away from making high part-count models like the Savage Wolf because I am confident I can (and will continue to) achieve this.

Two things.

1) Yes, well designed multi-parts are much better than poorly designed ones. Ball sockets, cylinders, good contact patches help enormously.

2) Multi-part minis represent a higher barrier to new mini fans, regardless of how well designed they are. It's frustrating to the newer folk, or those who don't get as much enjoyment out of assembling minis, if the only way they can get a favourite or factionally-appropriate mini is in too many pieces for their comfort level.

3) And there are too many poorly designed multi-part minis. Mainly historical, but I'll point to the Lament. Separate feet & legs, but there's no point, because they're not posable - the foot contacts the ankle with a flat plate. And the arm attachment points are tiny, and don't allow for posing. And that's a modern one, not the Reseen Thud or original Reseen Marauder.

I really appreciate you're thinking about these things. Two questions in return:

a) What is your main reason for going many pieces over less?

b) What are some of the sculpts you've produced?

[abou]

In a current era of more dynamic poses for miniatures, the single-part minis are probably not as attractive. BattleTech minis originally being released in an era when fantasy minis dominated, trying to get minimal-piece models likely made sense. Just looking through old catalogs, single-piece fantasy characters were pretty much the way to go; that mentality likely carried over. That being said, the ability to get more details with fewer undercuts, ease of access to remove mold lines, and more dynamic posing options justifies multipiece models. That we are now able to more routinely get better fits only helps with assembly.

Seeing the improvements from IWM over the past year is very encouraging. There have been some dodgy products in the past due to 3D printed masters and mold making, but that seems to be resolving. GW may have some of the best plastics out there, but metals are no slouch. People complain about metals, but once you start exploring other manufacturers and materials, you see a varied landscaped. Comparing other plastics and resins to Ral Partha and now modern IWM, metals are worth the price.

[worktroll]

It's not even about single-part minis. Smaller part numbers can give great results. I'll highlight the Reseen Archer (with the very notable exception of it's finicky missile bay doors.) One piece feet/legs/hips in a dynamic walking pose, torso which can be put on swivelled to left or right, and two single piece arms that can be put on as desired, even bent more or less simply.



I don't know many people who favour the old "standing at attention" pose of some of the old minis.



The new plastic minis have really done great work in providing dynamic poses that most people don't bother changing, effectively single piece (although I'd do some significant maiming to get hold of unassembled plastics, that dream ain't likely to fly, and it's so easy to mod the plastics if one feels inspired to do so.)



It's all about maximising the number of people who can get minis on the table with - for them - acceptable levels of investment of time & energy. The 'master class' multi-parts of the early Catalyst era hit the spot for the dedicated enthusiasts who are prepared to invest the time & effort - what percentage of players and potential buyers are these? 5%? 3%? I'd love to know.

Another case in point the Scylla.  Hands up those who gave up trying to get the individual fingers on?



Would a two-part arm - everything except the missile plate & fingers, and a single-piece 'crown' with the missile plate & fingers - been possible?

So no, not arguing for single-piece. Just welcoming & valuing the efforts of Crackerb0x & our other sculptors

Doing things like providing solid connection points that are keyed (and the keys can be removed if people want for additional poses) or providing built-in pins when connections are suspect have been something I've been trying to include whenever possible.

And requesting they consider the mass-market implications of going massively multi-piece.

[Colt Ward]

I paid someone to build my Scylla after I put it in a baggy for years.  It did not help the cast was a bit warped in the body.

Until the Primitive line rolled out I limited my mini purchase based on part count. I was burned by '67/Phoenix and I know I was not alone.  With that said I have bought the Juliano which has a LOT of parts . . . and was happy with it.

[Shin_Fenris]

Another case in point the Scylla.  Hands up those who gave up trying to get the individual fingers on?

I have four. Every one of them has all of the fingers. And I swore a blue streak each time. Do not recommend. It looks fine without them, I just really love the Scylla as-is & am willing to suffer for it.

[Colt Ward]

I have four. Every one of them has all of the fingers. And I swore a blue streak each time. Do not recommend. It looks fine without them, I just really love the Scylla as-is & am willing to suffer for it.

I love the Scylla (& Storm Giant) and think the art is fine as it is though I would love it in a Reaving plastic box just so I did not have to put on together.  I have used it on the table once (it can port a magclamp Minotaur) but would not mind more.  Part of the reason I want it in plastic is I would like to see a update- ATMs instead of LRMs?

Honestly, a IS mechwarrior would love to get their hands on a Scylla.

[abou]

I suppose the big question is what sells.

Clearly IWM has seen success and good reception from more complex assemblies. And newcomers are more likely to not be as discerning in details and lean towards plastic minis. That most of the preassembled plastic minis are made from many, many pieces isn't a factor there.

As long as IWM knows their audience and how to please them, it works out.

I hear what you are saying WT, but I guess I'm in it for me more than placating a group that likely doesn't care or recoils at metal minis reflexively. Because no matter how superior the details are, many won't be convinced no matter what you do because of prices or assumptions.

[Crackerb0x]

Two things.

1) Yes, well designed multi-parts are much better than poorly designed ones. Ball sockets, cylinders, good contact patches help enormously.

2) Multi-part minis represent a higher barrier to new mini fans, regardless of how well designed they are. It's frustrating to the newer folk, or those who don't get as much enjoyment out of assembling minis, if the only way they can get a favourite or factionally-appropriate mini is in too many pieces for their comfort level.

3) And there are too many poorly designed multi-part minis. Mainly historical, but I'll point to the Lament. Separate feet & legs, but there's no point, because they're not posable - the foot contacts the ankle with a flat plate. And the arm attachment points are tiny, and don't allow for posing. And that's a modern one, not the Reseen Thud or original Reseen Marauder.

I really appreciate you're thinking about these things. Two questions in return:

a) What is your main reason for going many pieces over less?

b) What are some of the sculpts you've produced?

To answer A) I'm also going to address the "barrier of entry" statement that was made. The Liya produced single-piece miniatures that CGL produces is extremely accessible to BattleTech players. I will grant that not every mini that IWM makes is made by Liya, but if barrier of entry is a concern, then the plastics is where those players should go and miss out on a few miniatures.

The mindset that I've been encouraged to have by Anthony (and who I agree with on this) about parting the plastic miniatures is that the IWM offerings are for the more serious/committed hobbyist that will want to have options. That they are a higher-price point offering and should come with the ability for greater control over the the pose of the miniature to reflect that, along with the cleaner casting provided by pewter over PVC. That's part of it.

The other main driving force of it is that the alternate loadouts, requested by IWM (variants/omni configurations) require additional parting to maximize reusability of existing parts.

Finally, the most important factor is castability. For instance, it was specifically requested by IWM that the Rifleman's side torsos be parted off because of casting concerns.

I've done the sculpt/parting work on the
Cyrano VTOL
Amarok
Viking IIC
Inferno

I've done the parting on these models that have gone from plastic to pewter
Night Gyr
Savage Wolf
Mad Dog
Archer
Phoenix Hawk
Nova Cat
Rifleman
Timber Wolf

And I think about half a dozen more models that Speck hasn't brought up yet, to my knowledge so I won't. Some of those models that I did the sculpt work for were in my early sculpting career and I wish I had another shot at for various reasons (Amarok and Viking IIC specifically) but still were generally fine outside of the cracking issue that we had for a few years there.

Finally, I wholeheartedly agree that multipart kits have a history of being poorly done. I don't understand why IWM refuses to cycle out anything, despite how poorly it was made, or how old it was, but also it's not my business.  However, the Lament is 10 years old (at least according to the copywrite on the image on the IWM website) so I would absolutely lump it in with effectively anything made prior to the BattleTech renaissance that started with the Game of Armored Combat Box and call it 'old'.

[Colt Ward]

Eh, Lament was when the Primitives started and multi-part since then have been good.  It was a surprise to see it coming though I hope that means it shows up more.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

The Lament isn't a terrible mini (unlike the Mad Cat Mk IV, Vulture Mk IV, or Tiburon) but it definitely shows as not being of the same level as modern sculpts.

[Alex Keller]

The mindset that I've been encouraged to have by Anthony (and who I agree with on this) about parting the plastic miniatures is that the IWM offerings are for the more serious/committed hobbyist that will want to have options. That they are a higher-price point offering and should come with the ability for greater control over the the pose of the miniature to reflect that, along with the cleaner casting provided by pewter over PVC. That's part of it.

I wholeheartedly agree.  Also, its very important to have proper scale.  I was quite disappointed to see that the Awesome, Marauder and Griffin are noticeably smaller than their plastic counterparts.  I don't even want to paint them anymore.  It doesn't look like you worked on any of those, but I'd say its not worth making a variant with IWM if they can't get the scale right. 

[Crackerb0x]

That was specifically because of bad communication, frankly, and misunderstanding of what needed to happen during that time. Pewter shrinks after it's cast and the guys who parted those (Alan/Anthony) didn't upscale anything digitally to compensate. I totally understand that feeling. My pewter Classics from that time will get painted still, but its definitely a bummer.

[abou]

I wish I knew more about the costs involved in mold making. IWM certainly has an advantage over plastic minis when it comes to fixing and releases, but that doesn't mean the cost is negligible. Still, it is a missed opportunity to fix something  -- especially when it can be done rapidly. I think that the drastic improvements over the years with new version of the 3055 and 3058 designs is a testament to cycling out old designs that could have been improved.

[Alex Keller]

If maintenance/storage of injection molds for old minis is what's holding back new molds, I think I'm finally ready to let the old ones go.  IWM is special in that I think its one of the last remaining miniature makers that can produce miniatures that were originally designed/made 30+ years ago.  We have been so privileged to be able to purchase the same miniatures that we loved back in the 1990s.  And parts too!

But some of these older sculpts, including some of the new, should be phased out if they are hindering IWM from making new ones.  I wish they would re-do the recent Awesome, Marauder, Griffin so they are scale appropriate. 

[Colt Ward]

How hard is the IWM Tbolt IIc to put together?  I thought it looked fine, but we have a new plastic one otw and I do not remember.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Been a while since I put mine together but I don’t recall any issues.