MattRendar
Mongoose
cant wait for that to come out . definately picking one of those up!!!
AT-43 minis pictures.
- Thread starter drawback
- Start date
I did a little mining on the net and pulled up these things. Some of these are from the demo ran at one of the big gaming conventions... GenCon 06 I think.
Now, if we look at the dumpy little mechs (striders), and compare them to the Marauders, our Marauders look pretty sweet, don't they? Here's what the warstriders prototype looked like (back durning the french open or something similar):
Now, if we look at the dumpy little mechs (striders), and compare them to the Marauders, our Marauders look pretty sweet, don't they? Here's what the warstriders prototype looked like (back durning the french open or something similar):
With regard to pricing, this boxed set is in line with current non-painted Mongoose figs.
2 boxes of Mobile Infantry - $40
2 Marauder box sets - $40
Totals the same $80 as this boxed set plus you get a few extras (scenery, measure and rules).
Fair enough, not everyone will like the sculpts or the paint job, but so far this is what Matt promised: pre-painted minis for the same price as their unpainted equivalent.
If SST:E and BFE are like this then I am a definite customer.
Are the pictures posted above pre-painted?
Cheers,
Eisho
2 boxes of Mobile Infantry - $40
2 Marauder box sets - $40
Totals the same $80 as this boxed set plus you get a few extras (scenery, measure and rules).
Fair enough, not everyone will like the sculpts or the paint job, but so far this is what Matt promised: pre-painted minis for the same price as their unpainted equivalent.
If SST:E and BFE are like this then I am a definite customer.
Are the pictures posted above pre-painted?
Cheers,
Eisho
I think the Rackham models are quite characterful and that they'll be good for miniature gaming in general.
I also think Hiromoon is bashing them unnecessarily. Some find the current Skinny range as a whole ugly, some absolutely love it. It's characterful. Rackham's models aren't any different. The skullheads look like something I would not want to mess with up close. The human walkers, while "stumpy" looking, appear quite realistic actually, if you take an engineering perspective. A machine so inherently unstable becomes less so when more of the weight is put close to the ground, including any weapons (recoil). The Marauder Bigfoot for example, while cool-looking, would tip itself right over and land on its own ammunition storage to boot! Not to mention the unarmored-from-the-front cockpits. Anyways, I'm not bashing Mongoose's mini's; they're all well-done and I really like 90% of the models. Rackham's are good too. War gaming miniatures have come a long ways and it's just going to get better with time.
I also think Hiromoon is bashing them unnecessarily. Some find the current Skinny range as a whole ugly, some absolutely love it. It's characterful. Rackham's models aren't any different. The skullheads look like something I would not want to mess with up close. The human walkers, while "stumpy" looking, appear quite realistic actually, if you take an engineering perspective. A machine so inherently unstable becomes less so when more of the weight is put close to the ground, including any weapons (recoil). The Marauder Bigfoot for example, while cool-looking, would tip itself right over and land on its own ammunition storage to boot! Not to mention the unarmored-from-the-front cockpits. Anyways, I'm not bashing Mongoose's mini's; they're all well-done and I really like 90% of the models. Rackham's are good too. War gaming miniatures have come a long ways and it's just going to get better with time.
Lorcan Nagle
Mongoose
Eisho said:
Yeah, but the SST box set is something like $90 worth of minis for $70. And while the scenery is kinda nice, it doesn't give the feeling of a significant saving as an introductory offer, like the SST box did.
Also, I really like the Heavy Gear-esque mecha prototype. I'd have so gotten some of them.
Actually, yes.
Also, by the definition of Dumpy (chunky: short and thick; as e.g. having short legs and heavy musculature), calling it Dumpy, especially with how it looks (come on, the legs are where the shoulders would be if it was in a remotely humanoid shape), isn't too far from the truth.
Also, by the definition of Dumpy (chunky: short and thick; as e.g. having short legs and heavy musculature), calling it Dumpy, especially with how it looks (come on, the legs are where the shoulders would be if it was in a remotely humanoid shape), isn't too far from the truth.
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
Tallen said:
I am with Hiromoon 100% on this.
Firstly, the Skinnies actually look like the Skinnies from the Animated series. Even though some of the range was not particularly successful, they LOOK LIKE something. The heads haven't been designed by a mini's designer - they look like Skinnies.
With regards to the 'Skull' look. If they are 'Aliens' WHY TF do they have human looking 'skulls' for faces. Do they know enough about us to use the imagery to attempt to scare you, or is a just a flook of nature/evolution. Isn't about time miniature companies came up with some slightly more original iconagraphy for the 'baddies'. Its tired and been gorram done to death now.
Slating the Marauders is silly, their design wouldn't work USING WHAT WE KNOW CURRENTLY ABOUT ENGINEERING - not neccessarily with what is going to be developed in the future. In the Animated series they are slow, but the advantages they bring with mobile weapon support far outweighs this.
As for making combat units nearer to the ground itself, that only applies to vehicles with more that TWO points of contact with the supporting surface (vehicles with tracks count as having mulitple contact points).
Minimizing clearance over the ground would cause problems in itself, and the shorter legs wouldn't neccessarily make them more stable with regards to shooting. They are still positioned on two legs, and not 'stabilized' they would still need additional support at the rear, or some form of recoil compensation.
As for armoured cockpits, they have bullet-proof materials which are INCREDIBLY resilient now! Let alone what we have to look forward to in the future.
Cost is Immaterial, if you want it you buy it.
In addition, the production paint standard of the Rackham miniatures are really poor - there surely can be no argument about that.
JoseDominguez
Mongoose
Before this argument continues..... picture the Fire toad, I mean, really, really picture it. Now picture it walking.
Now that's funny. Sort of like R2D2 with Hemorhoids.
Having said that, I quite like it, and lots of Rackham's stuff is a bit tongue in cheek anyway. Maybe these are meant to be a bit funny
Now that's funny. Sort of like R2D2 with Hemorhoids.
Having said that, I quite like it, and lots of Rackham's stuff is a bit tongue in cheek anyway. Maybe these are meant to be a bit funny
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
JoseDominguez said:Before this argument continues..... picture the Fire toad, I mean, really, really picture it. Now picture it walking.
Now that's funny. Sort of like R2D2 with Hemorhoids.
Having said that, I quite like it, and lots of Rackham's stuff is a bit tongue in cheek anyway. Maybe these are meant to be a bit funny
Yea, it would be fine on a flat surface - but how many battles are fought just on roads Lol!
JoseDominguez
Mongoose
I wouldn't be able to shoot at it for laughing anyway, ultimate armour. I still like it though.
Lieutenant Rasczak
Mongoose
JoseDominguez said:
Oh its a nice model, I just got bugged by the 'its more realistic' comment Lol.
roughneck GIR
Mongoose
Could I have a link? The guy with the goggles looks colHiromoon said:
