04/05/2016 at 14:30 #41643Angel BarracksModerator04/05/2016 at 14:45 #41644NoelParticipant
Is it the kind of thing I’m looking for? I haven’t met a period I didn’t like, but is it something that I actually collect and, more importantly, is it something I’m collecting at this moment?
Does it look good? I know this is subjective, but is it sculpted well, designed well? Or, at the very least, good enough for what I need?
Is the price “right”? Price expectations are variable, though.
Does it grab my attention? If I’m looking for a swashbuckler, how swashbuckley is it?05/05/2016 at 05:38 #41669paintpigParticipant
All of the above, unfortunately all of the above are personal and subjective.
I look for dynamic, well animated, properly proportioned dare I say it, believable figures, I know this reads dumb if you consider sci-fant …. but does it really? Just because the figure might be an ‘alf Ork or a Teifling doesn’t mean it should avoid selling believability.
For instance GW’s War Hammer sci-fant figures are way beyond what I would consider believable. Along comes Peter Jackson and suddenly GW makes believable fantasy creatures IMO. Fortunately most of what I collect is historical so ….you know.
Lastly another intangible, paintability, if a figure or vehicle passes muster on my criteria above it still has to sing to me, I have to want to paint it. I’m even prepared to to loosen my criteria slightly if the figure makes my brush finger itch, there are genres and periods I would love to game yet the figures dont stimulate my painting lobe/cortex whatever and the reverse is true also, hence my some what eclectic collection of figures.
Well that should be enough eh?
I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel
Slowly Over A Low Flame06/05/2016 at 13:30 #41701EtrangerParticipant
Models? For historical games it will be suitable and appropriate figures/vehicles/buildings for the era. Well detailed and accurate models are preferable but for wargaming purposes some degree of compromise is acceptable, eg I’ve used 1/96 scale Oerlikon guns from Naval model suppliers on nominally 1/100 (15mm) models, because there aren’t (or at least weren’t) any 1/100 versions available. I’m a little more forgiving of scale vagaries for sci-fi or fantasy, but they still need to sit ‘right’ together, & that is a subjective judgement.
Price, ease of construction and speed of delivery don’t really enter into it for me. Good service (not the same as fast service) does however.
If it’s a particular vehicle/aircraft etc that i’m really interested then I’m likely to head straight to 1/35 or another ‘modelling’ scale, rather than mucking around with the compromises in wargaming ‘scales’…03/02/2018 at 22:54 #83472KowariParticipant
I only do 28mm, so as a starting point it must either be in that scale, or close enough to look credible alongside my exiting 28mm miniatures. It must also be roughly modern because that’s the time scale I game in. Beyond that, there’s a vague set of criteria such as:
– if it’s a line or range of miniatures, can I think of a use for the new force I’d be adding to my collection? Do I have an existing opposition force for them?
– is there a bit of diversity in the figures?
– could it be modified into something interesting?
– does it *look* cool? I recently purchased one of Eureka’s 28mm figures, I think of a Soviet tank commander in a gas mask, leather helmet, with binoculars, purely because I liked the pose, it looked cool in a steampunk kind of way, and I thought it would be fun to paint, despite having zero practical use for such a figure.04/02/2018 at 10:01 #83486RhodericMember
A “model” as in a building or vehicle, specifically excluding figures?
Must it be as true to scale as possible?
Complicated question, and one that I may not be interpreting the way you mean it. It must correspond with the scale of the other models and figures for the same project, yes. But by that, I mean the actual scale, not the nominal one. “True to scale” could be taken to mean that it must correspond with one of the established, traditional scales such as 1/300. If for instance my nominal 6mm infantry are actually 7mm, which is considerably bigger than 1/300, then I want the model scaled for 7mm as well, not true to 1/300 scale.
That being said, often the only way to be sure of a model’s scale is to buy it and compare it for oneself. If I’m interested in getting multiples of a model, or multiple models from one range, then I may buy one model as a test piece first, before I even know what scale it properly is. So in that sense, no, I don’t need it to be as true to scale as possible before I consider buying it, if it’s feasible and applicable to buy a test piece. As I said, complicated question.
If a model building, or in some cases a model vehicle, has been designed with a scaleless quality about it, then that may make me more likely to buy it.
Well, I’ll consider buying it even if it’s not cheap. Whether I’ll ultimately be able to fit it into my hobby budget is another matter, but that wasn’t the question.
Easy to assemble?
As long as it’s not fragile once assembled, then I don’t particularly mind buying a model that’s moderately, but not infernally, difficult to assemble. For instance, I buy Heavy Gear Blitz mechs, which I would define as moderately difficult to assemble (especially as I make sure to pin some of the joints), but I don’t terribly mind.
Quick delivery time?
I’m fairly neutral to this question. Quick delivery time is obviously a good thing, but that wasn’t the question.
Fit in with the rest of your stuff?
Look how you expect it to look?
I don’t really understand the question.
Quality in production. I don’t mind filling in a few air bubbles in a resin model, but more serious problems with quality such as misaligned moulds tend to be a dealbreaker.
Quality in design. For instance, I stay away from most laser-cut models because they’re too 2.5D (not 3D enough) for my tastes.04/02/2018 at 15:48 #83533Don GlewweParticipant
My answer assumes you mean for a gaming table, so…
It has to contribute to the model at hand, which is: A model of the battle, and not a model of whatever it is it is supposed to be a model of.
The nearer the latter it can be, the better, but as soon as it encroaches detrimentaly on the former it becomes a negative influence, and no matter how pretty or well done or ‘true to scale’ it may be it’s rubbish.04/02/2018 at 20:27 #83571Ivan SorensenParticipant
Catch my eye OR fit a need I already have.
If it’s a pack of figures, variety of poses is a big deal to me.
Obviously, it also needs to fit the figures I already own at least fairly well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.