I have a confession to make

I have a confession to make.

I love monopose miniatures.

I absolutely fucking love them; I love the way they look on the tabletop, I love how easy they are to paint, I love how they can be made cheaply so you could fit hundreds of miniatures into an affordable box set. I just love 'em.

I admit, they don't work for every race or every setting. But when they work, they work so damn well

I miss them and would love it if companies brought them back. I already have a ton of em4 stuff and I want more.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Good monopose figures make me think of chess pieces. They are a joy. I think the absolute ideal for me though, is monopose dudes with a single customized leader figure.

That's the joy of the old system of buying the monopose figures and then add in metal ones as you want.

...

They were good for a game like Warhammer where you needed regiments in 20 or 30 figures (then later 40 and 50 in 8E).

They can usually make them look pretty good now as well. The Swordmasters from the 8E starter set were mono-pose and they looked great.

...

Honestly a lot of the mulitpart plastics were basically monopose as well; the chaos warriors for example.

And some of the best miniatures of 6th edition, the Empire spearmen and handgunners were monopose. (Alright, two or three monopose miniatures but still.)

I find monopose works better with some races than others. For orcs and such, they just look a bit wrong. Too ordered. Elves however, a perfect with monopose miniatures.

Another thing you can do is have most of the unit be monoposed but do the front rank in metal or convert them.

A lot of the WHFB sets where the idea was to get the poses compact enough to rank up had this look as well. I kept a bit of it for my AoS-era Stormvermin, their halberds look fantastic in a phalanx-style mob.

I have a feeling when OP says 'mono-pose' he means models that are cast as one solid lump as opposed to what mono-pose actually means.

But yeah they should have kept all the core choices mono-pose, especially if they wanted people to field these huge steadfast blocks of infantry.

Well, that's actually what I mean; you have these kits that promise all these options and poseability but when you build and rank them, they might as well have been monopose.

...

I actually really like the concept of these.

Sure, if you were on your own and you just wanted one species, then it would be a drag, but either you could pool together with your friends and buy them, or you'd buy a pack and you'd have all these other miniatures which could be the beginning or new armies, or units to use in a scenario for flavour, or conversion fodder, or whatever you wanted!

I also like the idea of it being monopose but with different heads to break it up and add some variety.

60 miniatures in a pack, 10 units each, each one viable for a game.

Buy three packs and you've got the core of six armies; add some skirmishers, characters, some metals, etc and there you go.

I know what you mean. I loved the bretonnian archers from the 5th edition starter set purely because of their uniformity. They looked like a homogenous force rather than a mob.

Although I figure you could find a reasonable compromise using figures with similar, but not identical poses.

True, but even today they still have that old school charm to them.

If you wanted fidelity and stuff, historicals have you sorted for doing human factions. But aside from using the em4 dwarves and orcs, fantasy is still poorly served.

>GW
>Doing the inexpensive option
>Rather than raising their profit margins AGAIN

Srsly?

Cheaper to produce, but they sell more per pack so the cost stays the same?

Eh, I don't even want GW to do them anymore. I'd rather another company had a go.

Wonder if Victrix would like a pop at the fantasy market?

The thing I assume GW figured out is that most people have limited space for miniatures and limited time to paint them.

After you reach that saturation point, your desire to buy more miniatures goes way down. They want to get as much money out of you as they can before you hit it. So cheap miniatures is unfortunately a losing strategy.

Then why did they keep raising minimum amy sizes and broke the rules to make larger units better? Plus you had Apocalypse for 40k.

...

One of the things GW used to do back in the day was to include cardboard counters with their scenarios and starter packs.

This had two good effects; first it allowed people without the collections to actually go and play the scenario pack. Second, it was a subtle advertisement, especially in the starter boxes: "Here's some cardboard just to get you by, but you know what would be AWESOME? The real miniature."

Posted the wrong ones.

Because what is describing are normies. A company like GW has to recognise that their sales are bimodal between normies and autists; they need to simultaneously appeal to both groups.

Kirby tried to hit the midpoint, which is a retarded strategy; Rountree figured out that you hit both at once if you want to win.

I just want a pack of plastic ones for a pound a pop or so mang.

Also these fuckers are getting recast and put in an army with the em4 orcs.