Discussion: Conversion model sizes

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Discussion: Conversion model sizes

Posted by Unknown

So Purgy wurgy raised a good point over at Best Overall. Let's assume Games Workshop is going to release things like Venoms, Tervigons, Tyrannofexes, Thunderwolves, Harpies, etc. at some point. One imagines they will because there is a huge untapped market of sales there (admittedly diminished by everyone's conversions). The point that Purgwurgy raised revolves around model sizes. Most people have made conversions based upon the army they are using. For example, most Tervigons, Tyrannofexes and Harpies are based off of Hive Tyrant or Carnifex models. If Games Workshop ends up making these kits end up being say 33% bigger than the plastic Carnifex, does this invalidate the conversions of individuals who have based their conversions on what Games Workshop had available at the time?

What about Thunderwolves? Not everyone has converted them so they can be seen when they are behind Rhino chassis but are still based off Space Marine proportions. If Games Workshop releases a Thunderwolf model which is clearly larger than a Rhino (height-wise), are all conversions invalidated if they are smaller? What about Venoms which are generally based off of Raider or Vyper models?

So the discussion boils down to: when do conversions model sizes become an issue, particularly when actual kits are released after the fact? Personally, as long as it is based upon an appropriate size (i.e. the examples listed above), it's okay in my book. Demanding players essentially bin all of their conversions and drop a lot of money on new kits to be technically legal is pushing the friendship, particularly since Games Workshop has taken so long to release certain models (Tyranids and Thunderwolves wave). As long as a player is clearly not aiming to make a much smaller model to gain some sort of advantage of the tabletop, let them go for it.

This also raises the issue of older models. 2nd ed models and a lot of 3rd ed models were a lot smaller than their current counter-parts (we all remember the old Tyrant and Screamer Killer? Land Raider? Rhino?). Games Workshop has no problem with people using these models as they are actually produced by them. Are conversions based off their models any different when they haven't released an actual kit?

Anyway, discuss away.

Comments (28)

Logging you in...

Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout

Logged in as

+2 Vote up Vote down

SageoftheTimes 77p · 736 weeks ago

I talked with Deep Kroot, and we started up a conversion about what GW thinks of things. Firstly, annoying metal models: It is SO MUCH CHEAPER, apparently, to produce metal molds (compared to plastic ones) that look good, that they've already made a profit on the DE Beastmaster & Beast pre-orders, but apparently JUST made back the money for the Warrior molds.

On the subject of conversions? GW WANTS PEOPLE TO CONVERT. There are other reasons for the lack of units, possibly cost, but mostly? They want people to actually do cool models.

Apparently they're surprised about the lack of custom dexes out there, too.

8 replies · active 736 weeks ago

+2 Vote up Vote down

Kirby 118p · 736 weeks ago

Metal moulds have always been cheaper which is why plastic moulds generally only get handed out for highly customisable options or quite large models (i.e. tanks).

If GW really wants people to convert things, well...ya poor business planning. TKE made a really good article in regards to potential cost of their moulds and whether or not they will re-coop their costs, but actually planning on individuals to create custom models and fan dexes...eh.

+1 Vote up Vote down

SageoftheTimes 77p · 736 weeks ago

From what he said, they're still surprised they made out this well, want people to customize models, and are surprised that people stick with dexes.

Doesn't mean I think it's good planning, but it's interesting to see what people think

+2 Vote up Vote down

Kirby 118p · 736 weeks ago

At least with Tyranids the Carnifex is pretty easy to convert.

Their biggest money buster is poor FAQs and lack of erratas. And they still haven't fixed the Nid one.

+2 Vote up Vote down

winter · 736 weeks ago

Totally agree with this Kirby. No official support for the community really puts a damper on the enthusiasm in my mind.

+1 Vote up Vote down

loudanddeep 48p · 736 weeks ago

I apologize for my ignorance, but I had to ask:

Who is "Deep Kroot" ?

Is this the handle of a GW person of some type?

Thanks...

0 Vote up Vote down

pimpdaddyork · 736 weeks ago

Some conversions can be over the top, like marines on goblin wolves. I don't think that people have noticed but there is a space wolf model.

I am scarred to write a codex because I imagine that police will break through my windows and door. I will be dragged off to GWs headquarters where I will be forced to paint models or play White Dwarf battle reports. All of this will happen because I copied some of GWs stuff.

Also I feel like a tard for asking but, kirbs where is your Email address. I can't find it and I need to send you emails full of ?s.

0 Vote up Vote down

ChaosGerbil · 736 weeks ago

I've written a LATD fandex, and no raids came. The biggest threat is one's work languishing in obscurity.

+2 Vote up Vote down

Goose · 736 weeks ago

Honestly, it's also because if they released all the new models out simultaneously, they would experience a massive short-term boost of sales before dropping down again. Staggering models out over a longer period of time lets them enjoy a steady cash flow that can be controlled, and makes good business sense- not to mention the fact many people do buy multiple kits to create a single conversion. If the new models good enough, people will buy the new ones as well.

Finally, let me just say this is a good business decision and I agree with it, and this isn't a GameWork$hiz sucks! Post.

+1 Vote up Vote down

artemi7 78p · 736 weeks ago

I've been running all my Rhinos as second ed Rhinos, and my Immolators/Razorbacks/whatever off the new Rhino kit. I've yet to run into someone who has an issue with my using two sizes.

That said, finding the old, OLD Ork Battle Wagon seems like it would prove useful, if you were worried about all those side shots...

1 reply · active 736 weeks ago

+1 Vote up Vote down

pimpdaddyork · 736 weeks ago

I hate those 2nd edition rhinos. It always gets me mad because they are so ugly to me. Also I don't see how ten guys can fit in there.

I find that a converted land raider works best for battle wagons. I hate how the front of the GW ones are so narrow.

+1 Vote up Vote down

Rupert40k 49p · 736 weeks ago

If people are playing purely for fun it matters little whether model sizes are inaccurate.

However, if playing in a tournament then model size variations can be game changing, such as:
1) Land Raider Battlewagons, much harder to get side shots.
2) Mini Thunder Wolf Cavalry, relative immunity behind rhino chassis.
3) Epic sized Greater Daemon, somewhat simpler to hide.
4) Forgeworld Greater Daemon, generates 3-4" movement upon summon.

These are but a few examples, the last one is actually legal which is hilarious.

At the end of the day, I personally think it always come down to the argument of: has there been sufficient time since the release of the "official" model that there is no reason not to have purchased some since then (Official model cost / weeks since release) gives you a "cheapskate" figure which is quite informative.

I'm the first person to use converted models or "counts as" models, BUT there must be fairness in their use, otherwise you end up looking like a prick.

7 replies · active 736 weeks ago

0 Vote up Vote down

willydstyle · 736 weeks ago

I really dislike player-created dichotomies between playing "for fun" or playing competitively. Any time you do something "out of the box" that can have a negative impact on your opponent's game, you are potentially denying them "fun," regardless of whether you're playing in your basement or at Nova.

+1 Vote up Vote down

Rupert40k 49p · 736 weeks ago

You may note I said: "playing purely for fun".

That isn't to say you can't play for fun at a tournament but that it is rare to play someone at a tournament playing "purely for fun".

If you go to tournaments and don't have fun then why are you going? There is no dichotomy involving tournaments and fun vs competitve, at least not for me.

+2 Vote up Vote down

willydstyle · 736 weeks ago

But even when playing a pickup game with nothing on the line (I dislike the term "playing for fun" because I agree that you should be having fun at a tournament), you can only control what you bring to the table, you cannot control how your opponent will react to it. Honestly, I've seen the most sour grapes as a result of perceived unfairnesses in non-tournament play than in tournament play.

+3 Vote up Vote down

Rupert40k 49p · 736 weeks ago

Fair one mate. I sadly haven't played a played a pick up game in maybe five years. Last pick up game I played ended on a sour note as I was playing by the rules lol!

+1 Vote up Vote down

willydstyle · 736 weeks ago

Personal experience doesn't really "prove" anything, but I tend to encounter more players who don't know the rules really well in tournaments... It's the opposite of how it "should" be, but it seems that first round I always end up playing the guy who *only* plays 3 times a year, and decides to play those games in a tourney.

+1 Vote up Vote down

abortedsoul · 736 weeks ago

You have to look at the alternative to just the "cheapskate" strawman. I have tervigons and tyrannofexes which I put endless hours of love into; if they slightly differ from the GW models, even in five years, I will still be using them. That said, if someone in a tourney has legit beef with them (i.e. if that were a -real- tervigon it wouldn't get a cover save!) I'd just give them the benefit of the doubt and forego the "ill-gotten" cover save on the alter of fairness. I doubt that any problems could arise that would not be solved by this.

+1 Vote up Vote down

Rupert40k 49p · 736 weeks ago

I would be surprised if when a tervigon or tyrannofex model is released it will differ significantly enough to be an issue for people who made a sensibly sized subsitute.

It's only an issue when it's game changing, like the mini TWC example. As I said, there must be fairness in model usage.

+2 Vote up Vote down

Atreides · 736 weeks ago

it is usualy obvious when someone has taken a huge amount of time and effort to build something unique for their army as opposed to simply using smaller/larger/taller/smaller model to gain some minor advantage.

in my own case, my converted vendettas are marginally narrower than the GW kit, but my weapons teams are much taller (converted robots). in both cases i put a lot of effort in, and despite being a competitive gamer, gaming was not my primary concern.

if someone had really gone to town and orkified a landraider kit, i wouldnt object in the slightest. if someone just buys a landraider and paints it green, then i may have a problem.

2 replies · active 736 weeks ago

+2 Vote up Vote down

Rupert40k 49p · 736 weeks ago

You pose a fair point, your vendettas look awesome but with vendettas as it's 12/12/10 there's not much of an issue even if the model is a bit different.

I am yet to see a suitably orkified land raider, I've seen plenty of embarassingly bad ones though, I personally believe GW made the Battlewagon have such a narrow frontage on purpose, as for the points, a 14/12/10 vehicle with a land raider frontage is too good.

0 Vote up Vote down

ChaosGerbil · 736 weeks ago

Before the new BW kit, anything between a Leman Russ and a LR sized wagon was widely accepted. I do not think this should be changed because of the new kit. I have about 6 battlewagons, all a reasonable size but none are exactly the same dimensions. I widened my kit BW with plasticard and bits because I wanted a cool model, I would hate to have people think badly of it because it is not as narrow as a rhino. Ork vehicles are supposed to be one of a kind anyways. Also I do not think the BW points cost depends on a narrow frontage, it is fairly priced as is whether skinny or fat. It has major weaknesses that something like a land raider does not, such as being easy to destroy in assaults, and not much firepower. Open topped really sucks in comparison to "assault vehicle."

0 Vote up Vote down

sinsynn 106p · 736 weeks ago

Funny that someone should mention the Canis Wolfborn model.
If that thing represents the size that GW thinks a Thunder Wolf SHOULD be, then pretty much every Wolf player I know is cheating.
I knew the second I saw that thing that nobody would be using it for conversions, or any other reason, really- what an abortion.....

Of course, if GW releases kits for the Tervigon, I'll have to purchase them.
A lot of Tournament players have ZERO sense of humor if my conversions differ in size slightly from the official kit.
I built Hive Guard conversions, and I was very careful to make sure they're actually a tiny bit bigger than the awful metal models.
Just want to avoid any arguments.

And BTW, Lol at "Purgy Wurgy."
You know he's an ex Marine, right?

3 replies · active 735 weeks ago

+1 Vote up Vote down

Kirby 118p · 736 weeks ago

Yes to ex Marine; no idea if Purgy Wurgy has anything to do with that though...enlightenment please? I've used it in our private *wink wink* convos before so I'm assuming he has no issue if it's in some way related to the Marines...

+1 Vote up Vote down

purgatus 90p · 735 weeks ago

No, I'm pretty damned secure. Ask my wife. ;D

+1 Vote up Vote down

Kirby 118p · 735 weeks ago

Tell her to stop ignoring my calls then! (and my blog is covered in pink; secure trumped :) )

0 Vote up Vote down

abortedsoul · 736 weeks ago

I doubt it will be a problem. I have custom made thunderwolves, tervigons and tyrannofexes. If they are slightly different than the future model ranges, then so be it. I still use my old rhinos and terminators (which still sit on the small slotted base), and I have never heard a whisper of a problem from either tournament officials or rivals. Even my custom Stormraven (which is essentially just a modified landraider on a vendetta flying base) I have never gotten flack. If someone doesn't like it, they should contact GW about not releasing any more codecies without proper models.

0 Vote up Vote down

Jalil · 736 weeks ago

if they only wrote rules for the models they have you run into C:CSM problems where the codex is bland. Compare to the 5th ed dexes where everybody got something new. if they'd have models for everything on release, then they'd lose out on printing moulds for all the shitty models.