Guess this is more of a rant than anything... Model Quality

Yeah… mine have side details too… they also have detail on the back part of the shoulder pouldron… but the front part is flat and lacks detail…



Those look like completely different parts to me (besides the axe). The low detail one looks sunken inward while the spruce is an outward bulb… so you both might be right in this comparison

Though in the end, mantic figures are cheap body fillers, they allow use of all figures so use fancy ones from other people might be the best option for those that prefer that aspect of the hobby.

If I want a hundred dwarves for a hundred euro I’d go mantic and accept I’d need to do a lot of my own sculpting if I wanted them to look better than ok or meh. If I wanted detail, I’d have to take out a major loan to afford something like Atlantas’ dwarves that are 40 quid/50 euro per 10 :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I don`t know, dude. When I saw that picture my first thought was that it looks like miscast. And then you say you have 4 sprues like that which means either you are really unlucky or there was fail in mass production.

1 Like

There is literally only 1 of that axe style per 10 figures… so it’s the same axe/arm, but cheap body fillers or not… they should really put more effort and faith into their own IP, otherwise, what’s the point?.

1 Like

In which case quality control needs checking if that’s the case lol

1 Like

If you want cheap good quality dwarfs go for the Oathmark range. 30 multi part plastics for £25.


Just look at the two pics next to each other, they are completely different is all I’m trying to point out. Since they have to be the same arm based on the axe and there only being one of the sort, then something somewhere has gone wrong with the sprues (either yours or his).

Effort costs manpower, manpower costs money, recuperating that money (especially at the volumes being sold considering this is a subset of a niche hobby) directly affects the prices. Some people want the low prices and the low detail doesn’t bother them.Others want more detail, and there are great alternatives out there for more detail. The game is open to players using those alternatives. That is the core of what I’m saying.

I don’t really think its pride, its more a business model it design cheap models that look good enough when lined up to support a rank and file system that takes advantage of a niche in the market that opened up when the major player controlling that niche suddenly dropped their support for it. (Said major playing being so dominant they can sell enough models to mass produce higher detail thus helping them hold the dominant position for so long). Its also picking your battles. Do you spend large investment on high level artists trying to compete with the dozens of others doing the same, or do you provide a more affordable alternative at the cost of your models being considered unit filler which is something the market has less competition in?

Just my musings on it.


Oathmark Dwarves look like Dwarfs, but that’s a matter of taste I guess. They are better than mantic in design definitely but neither hold a candle to say atlantis dwarves in detail (atlantis is expensive af though). But the logic here that I am having trouble with would say that mantic/oathmark should show some pride and try to meet higher (say atlantis) dwarf standards.

There are already major players in the expensive ring, so having players like mantic and oathmark in the cheap ring is nice if you catch my drift.

1 Like

You are right, but that is nothing new. At least for us who are playing KoW form beginning. Even Mantic allows armies from different companies to participate in their tournaments. So there is no “must have Mantic models for KoW” policy. We all can agree on that.

Now, are more expensive models better or not, is a discussion I don`t really care for. I buy miniatures that I like. Sometimes they are cheap, sometimes they are not. But I like them all. OK, I have mixed feelings about Mantic goblins =)

Main point of this thread is that the sprues that IMMORTALELF have are obviously faulty. He says it is by design, I say (I hope) it is production. It would be nice if couple more people who have new AD to chip in.

p.s. They are not mine, I found pic on Google.


Basilea all over again? =P

First Basilean M@A…god, they were truly awful. Goblins were solid second.


I heard rumors of the first sisters having arms longer than their legs as well. Was a problem with miscommunication and the factory wasn’t it? Scared me away from getting basileans even though I liked the idea and price for use in other games.

Definitely agree on the gobbos, though to be fair most gobbos don’t fall into my tastes. The newer vanguard gobbos look like they might be a step up, but haven’t seen um in person.

That is very true.

Personally I think there is a sweet spot between under detailed and over detailed, after seeing how GW’s models have become over detailed it is a relief to see models that aren’t cluttered in detail.

Mantic, aren’t after producing the best quality in terms of detail, they are after affordable models that look good on the table… which for the most part they do. As ThaneBobo mentions, the old Men at Arms, and Goblins were truly dreadful. Luckily Mantic have redone those models.


Definitely agree with you @Stonehorse. The sweet spot also probably differs from person to person as well, making these kind of discussions all the more interesting.

Oh, no, that is not a rumor. They had problems with arms. It is not noticeable when they are on table, but if you look close, you would notice that something is off. But I always thought their bodies were too short. The same is with old M@A and goblins. When people put them in hordes, it was less obvious that they are not good miniatures.

1 Like

There is a very kitchy estetic to a lot of the new GW is producing. I hope mantic never falls that far down the rabbit hole.

That being said. OP has a point though. It’s either misscast or the design should be better.


I’m not saying they should be on Par with Atlantis or GW, but just a little extra care when designing, making sure “visible” areas are detailed and not blank or poorly detailed compared to say another area of the same part on the miniature… if that means casting the legs and torsos in 2 pieces, why not? I’m a Hobbyist, I like the building and painting as well as the gaming but feeling like i can’t even get a “tabletop” unit because of poor model design? Is very disheartening, i understand mantic allow us to use 3rd party models, but I personally would prefer it if in a 2000 point game atleast half the points or 3/4 were Mantic (unless it’s an unsupported army in terms of models… the plastics themselves are fine, resin is… well… resin… and the metal? Maybe needs a mold update or refresh… but the Decimators/Blacksouls are “New” models so these issues shouldn’t even be a thing!! And that’s the annoying bit, I’d rather support them from a gaming perspective and model perspective… it’s these issues that make it difficult…

So with your logic, they look crap individually but look passable as a horde… is completely acceptable to customers?? I’d struggle to take these in a vanguard where the focus is single model orientated.

I plan on sculpting and making resin multibases for KoW… if I sculpt and cast a base that I’m not happy with, I wouldn’t put it up for sale until I improved what I didn’t like… it isn’t 1988 anymore where everything is sculpted by hand… Pc’s and 3d printers should make the job 1000x easier