New MkIV Tactical Squad + Assault Squad + Maximus Battle Group

[roryokane]

4 hours ago, Jukkiz said:

Knowing GW we´re 100% losing the waist posing options like all modern updates to heresy armor marks. Examples of current mk. 2,3.6

It´s kinda... soso overall, but when you have army of 40 or more marines, samey poses are quite repeated. While true that losing waist posing doesn´t mean much to some, but to me it atleast allowed that little more of variety amongst marines of many sorts. That combined with different arms and so meant it was joy putting together different marines, not just another 20man bolter/special/melee squads.

 

3 hours ago, derLumpi said:

 

I agree with you. I just bought an old MkIV squad and I still have a lot of old MkIIIs for kitbashing purposes. Moving away from the modularity we had with the old kits is a huge mistake in my opinion not only in heresy also with the 'firstborn' kits.

 

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

It particularly bothers me because they could absolutely have kept some kind of balljoint at the waist whilst upscaling the models. Having built a fair few classic-scale modular Marines with longer 3D printed legs, they look right at home next to the new-scale stuff, and there's nothing that would have stopped them subtly improving the proportions in general whilst maintaining that waist joint. Especially for Heresy era Marines which are fairly stripped down and uniform.

You guys have summed it all up - the fact that we had, between 40k space marines, old 30k plastics (Mk III and IV), and forgeworld stuff for both, as well as various divergent chapters AND Chaos Space marines all intercompatible was one of the best things about the pre-8th Hobby. The combinations were practically infinite, and that is why I have hundreds of bits stockpiled and de-sprued and sorted to keep me going after the last old-style marines go OOP (right now it's just the tactical and devastator squads that are left, and they're not long for this world, I fear...).

I also wish they'd given us more notice on the Mk IVs going OOP, because I would have bought some before hand just to have a few more boxes in stock.

[Orion]

2 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

It particularly bothers me because they could absolutely have kept some kind of balljoint at the waist whilst upscaling the models. Having built a fair few classic-scale modular Marines with longer 3D printed legs, they look right at home next to the new-scale stuff, and there's nothing that would have stopped them subtly improving the proportions in general whilst maintaining that waist joint. Especially for Heresy era Marines which are fairly stripped down and uniform.

 

And use pegs you can clip off if they're worried about posing.

Like Crisis suits.

[Blissful Brushes]

There’s two big issues with this in my opinion, and I Think Ive said this about scale on a different thread.

 

They made a huge rod for their own backs with the whole primaris thing. They did a range refresh on Space Marines, like they have at some point with most factions, and rather than being up front about the whole let’s make Space Marines as big as they should be, they came up with some whacky (in my opinion) lore to justify it. I think most players would have accepted bigger marines because we have all at some point thought, I wish I had the energy/talent etc. to go full Doghouse or Apologist and truescale my whole army. So they keep doubling down on that silly organ making trans-trans-humans.

 

The second issue is the whole posing stuff. They’ve marketed 40k to the beginner who’s going to buy a starter set, maybe buy a couple squads and a tank if they enjoyed it. If they’re really enjoyed it, they might step into another faction than the two starter factions but that’s probably a minority. They don’t need to have a huge amount of poseability (dunno if that’s a word) because 90% of the customers probably won’t get ever get more than 2 of a single box.

 

I think the real tragedy is that they’re no longer really marketing at modellers or collectors, but at the game side or easy new sales.

[NorthernUltramarines]

8 minutes ago, Blissful Brushes said:

 

 

I think the real tragedy is that they’re no longer really marketing at modellers or collectors, but at the game side or easy new sales.

 

Completely understand your points, but I do unfortunately think it's a subjective point. I've been collecting for donkeys and while the older kits could be posed I vastly prefer the newer kits. I think they look far more characterful and are far more fun to paint, plus they look nicer on my shelf. But that's just how I feel and it isn't a set "This new way is simply superior" it's just an aesthetic preference, no one is wrong for thinking either way. I do think for many painters the newer kits are better as they are often posed more cinematically, but it does mean repeated poses in armies if you feature multiple of one character. 

[Elzender]

While I also mourn a bit the loss of separate torsos and legs, I can understand the design logic they used for the new tacticals and the upgrade sprues to maximise compatibility. However, I wish they had done slight variations between armour marks on the five basic poses (eg: mirroring some of the poses) or maybe even have a pool of 8-10 stances, and each mark getting 5 of them that there is only partial overlap and not just 4 marks with the exact same poses.

[Robbienw]

46 minutes ago, Elzender said:

While I also mourn a bit the loss of separate torsos and legs, I can understand the design logic they used for the new tacticals and the upgrade sprues to maximise compatibility. However, I wish they had done slight variations between armour marks on the five basic poses (eg: mirroring some of the poses) or maybe even have a pool of 8-10 stances, and each mark getting 5 of them that there is only partial overlap and not just 4 marks with the exact same poses.

 

I concur.  

 

I'd love the ball jointed waist back.  It worked on the Deathwatch 2016 kit, who were ball jointed but also upscaled.  Sadly a return to this doesn't look like its going to happen anytime soon as they've been sticking to the current body forms assembly for the past 9 years or so.

 

So they really need to introduce more variant plain bodies.  Would have been much better if each unit had 10 different poses, and also if they had not replicated poses across all the armour marks.  

[Blindhamster]

i like the added detail and movement you get on the newer models, the abdomen actually getting some level of detail is nice. 

BUT I concur that for it to work in HH in particular, you need your line infantry kits to have minimum 10 variant poses. 

[Robbienw]

I had hoped they'd be more poses with kits coming out like Breachers but they just went with the addon sprue.  And with Rapiers, which whilst they did actually give them new poses, they also gave them a whole new type of support armour!!

 

At least there were new poses with assaults squads.  It is possible to swap legs from those and tacticals with careful cutting.

 

I'm sure it will change in future though.  It took years for example for MK X marines to get a somewhat expanded range of variant poses for units in the same armour styles, they are only getting there now 9 years later.

 

The current 30k infantry models are fantastic, so its not the most pressing issue for 30k.

Edited June 11 by Robbienw

[phandaal]

4 hours ago, Blissful Brushes said:

The second issue is the whole posing stuff. They’ve marketed 40k to the beginner who’s going to buy a starter set, maybe buy a couple squads and a tank if they enjoyed it. If they’re really enjoyed it, they might step into another faction than the two starter factions but that’s probably a minority. They don’t need to have a huge amount of poseability (dunno if that’s a word) because 90% of the customers probably won’t get ever get more than 2 of a single box.

 

People might chimp out at you over the first part of your post. 

 

Agreed on this second part 100% though. Even with two boxes, it is noticeable. Heck, sometimes even with the same box because they do a 10-model unit and the box is 5 dynamic poses repeated twice. It actually does make a huge difference being able to turn the torsos slightly and swap them between different sets of legs. Not to mention what everyone else said about being able to swap bits around to different kits.

 

That applies to more than just Space Marines as well.

[derLumpi]

3 hours ago, Elzender said:

While I also mourn a bit the loss of separate torsos and legs, I can understand the design logic they used for the new tacticals and the upgrade sprues to maximise compatibility. However, I wish they had done slight variations between armour marks on the five basic poses (eg: mirroring some of the poses) or maybe even have a pool of 8-10 stances, and each mark getting 5 of them that there is only partial overlap and not just 4 marks with the exact same poses.

 

I totally get what you mean and I also really get why GW went into the current direction. The tragic thing is that we already had probably infinite posing possibilities accross all kits.

Now, we have, in theory, also a lot of options because you can use those close combat, heavy and special weapons accross all armour marks. But it doesn't really matter because if you have only so much different poses regarding those damn fixed torsi (?).

 

Ah well, enough ranting from me. I go onto my corner and build some reconaisance marines. 

[Blissful Brushes]

8 hours ago, NorthernUltramarines said:

 

Completely understand your points, but I do unfortunately think it's a subjective point. I've been collecting for donkeys and while the older kits could be posed I vastly prefer the newer kits. I think they look far more characterful and are far more fun to paint, plus they look nicer on my shelf. But that's just how I feel and it isn't a set "This new way is simply superior" it's just an aesthetic preference, no one is wrong for thinking either way. I do think for many painters the newer kits are better as they are often posed more cinematically, but it does mean repeated poses in armies if you feature multiple of one character. 

 Yeah I’m not going to disagree - the new models are beautiful but there are definitely ways they could have made them more modular, just look at the Saturnine terminators, who to the casual are probably too far on the other end of the scale. I might be in the minority but as a modeller primarily I think I’d have paid a little bit more for that modularity to make conversions and kit bashing easier. 
 

As far as primaris lore goes..I never bothered reading it tbh, it’s 10,000 years further forward than my main interest. it could be amazing, but without me derailing this, it’s very convenient that those primaris were discovered and couldn’t use tactical marine stuff, but hey maybe I’m a cynic lol

[MoriyaSchism]

5 poses shared across 4 different kits. Assault Marines appear to be moving in the same direction as well. Command and heavy support units relegated to upgrade kits for the 5 identical poses from the basic infantry box with unique silhouettes and details removed. Whatever happened to unique backpacks for heavy weapons? I think the upgrade kits are good, but it just feels a little plain without extra ammo or anything like that. It's just confusing that the same company that made the Tactical, Devastator and Assault Squad boxes decided to make something like this as plain as possible. 

Edited June 11 by MoriyaSchism

[Crimson Longinus]

I think it is really weird how they're handling it for HH. I think the current combined torso and legs design is good as it allows properly sculpted abdomen, but for 40K marines there actually is now a ton of primaris poses as every kit has slightly different ones. But for HH they apparently decided just keep repeating the same five ones, which can become noticeable. 

[SvenIronhand]

The same five poses is because every 'base' kit has to be compatible with weapons upgrades, each individual weapon only fitting one individual pose.

[Crimson Longinus]

8 minutes ago, SvenIronhand said:

The same five poses is because every 'base' kit has to be compatible with weapons upgrades, each individual weapon only fitting one individual pose.

 

That can't be really true. They're holding their weapons in their hands, the pose of the legs will mostly not interfere with that. 

[Blissful Brushes]

The reality is because it’s easy in terms of manufacturing. My understanding is that retooling plastic sprues is difficult (for want of a better word). If they can have nigh on 75% of their HH range churning out 3 or 4 different sprues in total - one per power armour, they can just leave that rolling and just do accessory sprues for everything else in the range. 
 

i imagine it’s a finance/logistics question rather than artistic because let’s face it, the models are dope, the issue is there’s only 5…

Edited June 11 by Blissful Brushes

[phandaal]

35 minutes ago, Blissful Brushes said:

The reality is because it’s easy in terms of manufacturing. My understanding is that retooling plastic sprues is difficult (for want of a better word). If they can have nigh on 75% of their HH range churning out 3 or 4 different sprues in total - one per power armour, they can just leave that rolling and just do accessory sprues for everything else in the range. 
 

i imagine it’s a finance/logistics question rather than artistic because let’s face it, the models are dope, the issue is there’s only 5…

 

That could be it. Although they could have done that with modular legs and torsos as well.

[Joe]

Amusingly, the "five-pose method" goes all the way back to the resin armour marks. You can see where they've used the same base dollies to sculpt onto all the way Mark II through VI. 

 

Would also note that Blissful is likely the closest to the mark - I'd wager the design team do tend to produce more varied poses and equipment, but it's ultimately the guys in tooling who decide what they are going to do, what can go on the sprues, etc.

[Robbienw]

The thing with the resin armour marks though was they did more  original leg poses with the second version of the the Legion armour resins, plus you got more unique legs poses that were fully swappable with the support and assault squads.  Also Rapier crew bodies, althought they weren't seperated.

 

Then the plastic MKIII and MKIV came along and added more leg poses.  Plus you could also pull in some MKVI legs pairs from the 40k tactical and assault kits.

 

Really they just need to do another generic infantry sprue for each armour mark.  Hopefully they'll move onto a bit more basic infantry variation after MK5 comes and we have all basic heresy armour types.

 

Could also do with a 30k Space Marine Heroes set, as that always brings some nice variation.

Edited June 12 by Robbienw

[Wispy]

10 hours ago, Joe said:

Amusingly, the "five-pose method" goes all the way back to the resin armour marks. You can see where they've used the same base dollies to sculpt onto all the way Mark II through VI. 

i don't miss classic poses at all tbh. they're all vaguely squatty and horse-stancy and it all comes across kind of samey to me anyways.

 

with newer designed kits, I find the stuff that GW does with arms gets a lot more milage with the different kinds of arms and how they hold the bolters. you can get a lot of variance in how you rotate the body, where the head is facing etc.

 

 

[Blindhamster]

fun thing with resin is it can be subtly bent as well, which opened up some minor reposing options there 

[MoriyaSchism]

29 minutes ago, Wispy said:

i don't miss classic poses at all tbh. they're all vaguely squatty and horse-stancy and it all comes across kind of samey to me anyways.

 

with newer designed kits, I find the stuff that GW does with arms gets a lot more milage with the different kinds of arms and how they hold the bolters. you can get a lot of variance in how you rotate the body, where the head is facing etc.

Who was asking for the old power squat poses back? Can't they do 10 of the new poses for each kit? We aren't talking about Primaris models either, there aren't any identical body poses in the currently released Primaris boxes. How would you feel if the Grey Hunters and Intercessors had identical poses? Would that be good too? 

 

11 hours ago, Joe said:

Amusingly, the "five-pose method" goes all the way back to the resin armour marks. You can see where they've used the same base dollies to sculpt onto all the way Mark II through VI. 

Aren't products supposed to get better with subsequent releases? Why does the new stuff have less options or build variety? 

Edited June 12 by MoriyaSchism

[NorthernUltramarines]

12 minutes ago, MoriyaSchism said:

Who was asking for the old power squat poses back? Can't they do 10 of the new poses for each kit? We aren't talking about Primaris models either, there aren't any identical body poses in the currently released Primaris boxes. How would you feel if the Grey Hunters and Intercessors had identical poses? Would that be good too? 

 

Aren't products supposed to get better with subsequent releases? Why does the new stuff have less options or build variety? 

 

I'm fairly sure the Primaris boxes are double sets of 5 poses, they just do a better job at giving more arm options so it hides it easier. In this picture, models 5 and 9 have the same pose, for instance. Can also see it on models 3 and 4 where they've got the same pose, but the arms/head just help give the model a different "direction" so it's a bit less obvious.

[MoriyaSchism]

12 minutes ago, NorthernUltramarines said:

 

I'm fairly sure the Primaris boxes are double sets of 5 poses, they just do a better job at giving more arm options so it hides it easier. In this picture, models 5 and 9 have the same pose, for instance. Can also see it on models 3 and 4 where they've got the same pose, but the arms/head just help give the model a different "direction" so it's a bit less obvious.

This has nothing to do with the question I asked. What if the 5 model sprue from the Intercessor box was identical to the 5 model sprue from the Grey Hunters box? Would that be good? The Cadian box for example is a set of paired 5 model sprues, however it also has 10 different front plates for the torso and more arms than it is required to build just 5 models. Same thing with Intercessors and other Primaris kits. Why are most Heresy infantry kits made in a different way than most mainline 40K kits? 

[NorthernUltramarines]

2 minutes ago, MoriyaSchism said:

This has nothing to do with the question I asked. What if the 5 model sprue from the Intercessor box was identical to the 5 model sprue from the Grey Hunters box? Would that be good? The Cadian box for example is a set of paired 5 model sprues, however it also has 10 different front plates for the torso and more arms than it is required to build just 5 models. Same thing with Intercessors and other Primaris kits. Why are most Heresy infantry kits made in a different way than most mainline 40K kits? 

 

Apologies! Misread what you meant with your post. I genuinely just think it's a slight cost cutting measure, it's why you can get 20 marines for £50.50 but 10 intercessors cost £40. Not saying it should happen, or that there isn't a way to make them both cheaper and still have variety, but it's probably the reason behind it.