A number of weapons in Full Thrust are identified as 'genre specific',
ie not part of the GZG-verse background, intended only to give FT the
flexibility to be used in anime-style settings, etc. For instance Nova
Cannon and Wave Gun.
What in the DSII book, if anything, is 'genre specific', ie not used by
any of the GZG-verse powers? The only obvious canidates are oversized
vehicle/modular vehicles, and big walkers (size 4+). Any thoughts?
Maybe a word from Jon on which he considers part of the GZG-verse and
which isn't?
I recently purchased two (!) Ogres, already have a Scotia Rolling Thunder, and
I also got two big grav tanks, so I've been thinking about an Imperial
Dinochrome Turma.:)
In a message dated 99-02-20 15:20:43 EST, you write:
<<
I recently purchased two (!) Ogres, already have a Scotia Rolling Thunder, and
I also got two big grav tanks, so I've been thinking about an Imperial
Dinochrome Turma.:) >>
Where did you find the Ogres!
Perry
Plenty of Pan-European Fencers around; not my favorite, but I couldn't
resist
them on sale. I've two in-blister.
Also three Mark V's out of blister (one painted, others not), or is it four
(only enough weopens for two of 'em, but easy enough to bash)? And one of the
rare Mark III's.
Anyway, I'll probably try to use one of the V's and a Fencer as temptation to
draw contestants to a DSII tourney in the fall at Tactikhan in Denver. Haven't
decided what would be interesting for FTII participants. Maybe some old
blisters of SpaceFleet 'nids and Imperials. Have a few of those...
The_Beast
PERRYG1@aol.com on 02/20/99 03:37:56 PM
Please respond to gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
cc: (bcc: Doug Evans/CSN/UNEBR)
Subject: Re: [DSII] Genre
In a message dated 99-02-20 15:20:43 EST, you write:
<<
I recently purchased two (!) Ogres, already have a Scotia Rolling Thunder, and
I also got two big grav tanks, so I've been thinking about an Imperial
Dinochrome Turma.:) >>
Where did you find the Ogres!
Perry
Hi !!!
In einer eMail vom 20.02.99 22:38:48 MEZ, schreiben Sie:
<< Where did you find the Ogres!
Perry >>
Try: <<A HREF="http://www.omenweb.com/shop/minis/ogre.html">
http://www.omenweb.com/shop/minis/ogre.html</A>>
TschüÃ!!! Hauke
> At 05:23 PM 2/20/99 -0600, you wrote:
Haven't
> decided what would be interesting for FTII participants. Maybe some old
I've got, lemme see now...four Fencers, 5 Mark Vs (two of them painted,
ealthough one is a Grenadier figure)), 4 Mark III's, one Mark IV (don't
ask), and four of the old-style "Demolisher" tanks, which are certainly
Ogre sized, if not shaped. Plus three robots from Grenadier's "Paranoia" line,
that look like Mark I's. No, none are for sale. I just like talking about
them....
My Ogre minis (Paneueopean) were the first microarmor I ever painted. The red
and black paint scheme is not in line with my current habits or skills, but
nostalgia demands that I paint anything new that I acquire to match.
Out of curiousity, how do people write up Ogres, anyway? They don't fit with
the Illuminati doctrine (Ogres leave LOTS of physcial traces), but I
should paint one up for them anyway--just as a nod to their origin.
4 Tread modules--Size 5 Each,
Front Hull--Size 7: 2 Class 5 MDC (fixed), 3 Mass Driver RAM Batteries
Rear Hull--Size 7: Superior ADS System, 3 GMS/H systems.
This requires sharing space between modules for some systems, though, and I'm
not sure if that's legal. It's not really faithful to the way that the "real"
Ogre works (I could *not* figure out how to fit the Secondary
Batteries, despite much effort), but that doesn't bother me--if I want
to game with real Ogres, I'll play Ogre miniatures.
> On Sat, 20 Feb 1999, John M. Atkinson wrote:
Very cool. A friend has a batch of Ogres (I think 3 MkV, 1 MkIII, one or two
Fencers) which we've run in DS2 in the past.
Be warned that DS2 is not kind to supertanks - an Ogre is dangerous, but
it's also a damned big target. Literally almost impossible to miss, so you
just whale away at the damn thing until you get the right handful of RED chits
or a BOOM. Or get MDCs or DFFGs into their Close range band. The Ogre might be
killing three or four of your vehicles per turn, but your battalion is
throwing so much firepower downrange at the Ogre that it IS
going to die. We ran an armour battalion vs one MkV w/ a light
mechanized company in support, and the Ogre's side was wiped out...
Rules adjustments are needed to accomadate Ogres in DS2...
Our MkV stats (roughly): 2x MDC/5 (tu) Main Battery. 4x MDC/2 Secondary
Battery. 16 APSWs. 6 tubes of Heavy Artillery. 2x GMS/H. 4 Firecons.
Main Hull Size 7, Armour 8. Aft Hull Size 6, Armour 7. 4x Tread Modules, ea.
Size 4, Armour 5. (I think this is right. It's been a couple months or more
since we did the DS2 Ogre games, and this is purely off the top of my head.)
Our MkIII stats had the same Main Battery, lost most of the Arty and
GMS/H
and Secondary Battery. Can't recall anything more about it.
they died...they died hard, but they did die. I have a Company of SuperHeavy
Battle Tanks that're just MADE to hunt Ogres...
We never did give our Ogres Nukes in their artillery. Should have, probably.
Would've made them much, much more deadly...
> On Sat, 20 Feb 1999, John Crimmins wrote:
> I've got, lemme see now...four Fencers, 5 Mark Vs (two of them
The
> red and black paint scheme is not in line with my current habits or
Stick Secondary Batteries and APSWs in the Tread Modules. Not, perhaps, legal
(rules don't say) but it allows you to get closer to the 'real' Ogre designs.
that's how we wound up doing our Ogres...
> Plenty of Pan-European Fencers around; not my favorite, but I couldn't
Haven't
> decided what would be interesting for FTII participants.
Just tell me there'll be FT or DS2 in Denver and I'll be there. I'll probably
get the (heavy combat) pants beat off me, but I'll be there.
- Sam
> Brian Burger wrote:
> Be warned that DS2 is not kind to supertanks - an Ogre is dangerous,
I know. Just as an exercise I knocked out an Ogre and a Bolo (both owned by
John Wilkes, whom y'all will meet at the con, if y'all show.
It's a matched set--my buzz and his pony tail) with a militia tank
destroyer company and a handful of Akritai. But you have to use them right.
For one thing, they really ought to be supported by lighter
units--the Imperial Dinochrome Turma is going to have a bunch of GW
Dreadnoughts (size 1 or 2 walkers) that I picked up as part of the same
deal, plus some size 6-7 grav tanks and probably some drones (size 1
VTOLs) as well. For another, they really do work best in groups--I want
to put the entire Turma (technically regiment, but it will be the only turma I
can represent 1 for 1 on the table, so no more than 2 Ogres and a Bolo, plus
supporting units)
> We never did give our Ogres Nukes in their artillery. Should have,
Of course, if you have nuclear weapons release, it only takes one nuke to kill
the Ogre. And if the Ogre were spewing nukes, then it wouldn't take long to
get nuclear release.
> PERRYG1@aol.com wrote:
They were part of a deal advertised on this list, and I bought the whole mess.
Two Ogres, two aerospace fighters, 8 GW dreadnoughts, a walker I'm still not
sure where it's from, and a bunch of Renegade Legion and Scotia stuff.
> At 04:35 PM 2/21/99 +1000, you wrote:
I think that I have the same figures that you do. I've got an entire
Paneuropean army: the only unofficial models are the Superheavies (Partha's
second Demolisher), the MHWZs (GW figs), and the Missile crawler (also
GW).
Oh, and the Infantry--GW again. When/if I get a chance to do so, I'm
going to paint the official versions of the SHVY and MHWZ to match the rest of
the army. The Paneuopean LGEVs are the best looking SF microarmor I've
ever seen--I just wish I could see what the GEV-PC would have looked
like--and I already have them painted up and added in. The Combine LGEV
are nice too, but I can't help but think that they look kinda like tennis
shoes.
> Grenadier Ogres? I knew Martian Metals made some, but Grenadier?
I might be misremembering. I picked them up from a store that specialized in
OOP items, at Origins many moons ago. We were the exclusive carriers of GZG in
those days.... As I recall, the blister packages were white, and
the same people made Car Wars figures--which I've been working on this
very evening. (I discovered that GW IG motorcycles are perfect for Car Wars
miniatures, and that set off a whole new round of painting.)
> With a bit of luck, SJ may licence another firm to do some more sooner
I talked to an SJG rep at an open house a few years ago, and apparently Steve
himself wants to do the new figures in a larger scale. I'm hoping that this is
no longer the case.
> John Crimmins wrote:
> I've got, lemme see now...four Fencers, 5 Mark Vs (two of them
You're a Cruel, Cruel Man. All I have is a Mk V, Mk IV (the only one in Oz,
AFAIK), a Mk III, and 6 Fencers. Plus a fair few PanEuropean and Combine
stuff, a lot of which is quite rare (Combine Mobile Howizers,
> On 2/21/99 12:35 AM Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote:
> You're a Cruel, Cruel Man. All I have is a Mk V, Mk IV (the only one in
I always get a little green eyed when you mention the Combine rarities you've
acquired Alan. However I won't complain. In the last two years I've been able
to add a number of OGREs to my collection (now if only they were all painted).
IIRC I'm somewhere around the following: 8 Mk Vs, 1 Mk IV, 12 Mk IIIs, and 10
or so Fencers. Someday we'll have to get all us OGRE collectors together
(wouldn't that require a lot of flying) for one massive OGRE battle to end all
engagements.
> With a bit of luck, SJ may licence another firm to do some more sooner
I for one would welcome this...
In a message dated 99-02-21 03:23:36 EST, you write:
<< >With a bit of luck, SJ may licence another firm to do some more sooner
> than you think.
I for one would welcome this... >> What was the first film?
-Stephen
Hi !!!
BTW: Omen also still sells lots of "Renegade Legion" blisters and they
still have some of Fasa's "Star-Trek" ships in stock...
<<A HREF="http://www.omenweb.com/shop/index.html">
http://www.omenweb.com/shop/index.html</A>>
TschüÃ!!! Hauke
> John M. Atkinson wrote:
Powerguns from Jon Tuffley's version of Hammer's Slammers. I can't think of
anything else.
Andrew Martin wrote in reply to John Atkinson:
> >What in the DSII book, if anything, is 'genre specific',
> Powerguns from Jon Tuffley's version of Hammer's Slammers. I can't
The powerguns aren't in the DSII book...
> Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:
Yes. That's right. But the Hammer's Slammers supplement seems to be the only
other thing written by Jon Tuffley and does seem like a supplement to DSII and
could be considered a part of the DSII book.
In a message dated 99-02-21 03:58:54 EST, you write:
<<
<< >With a bit of luck, SJ may licence another firm to do some more sooner
> than you think.
I had heard that SJG was negotiating with several parties last year but that
they broke down. Anyone know the story on this and more importantly, when we
get to buy Ogres and GEV's again?
Perry
> Brian Burger wrote:
> Be warned that DS2 is not kind to supertanks - an Ogre is dangerous,
Main
> Hull Size 7, Armour 8. Aft Hull Size 6, Armour 7. 4x Tread Modules,
> On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Donald Hosford wrote:
The
> > Ogre might be killing three or four of your vehicles per turn, but
Main
> > Hull Size 7, Armour 8. Aft Hull Size 6, Armour 7. 4x Tread Modules,
We never bothered with special armour rules for Ogres. Just gave them lots
of regular DS2 armour - Arm. 7 or so...they still died. It doesn't take
twin MDC/4s long to punch thru Arm7 when at close range...those
superheavy
tanks I mentioned several posts ago. (Size 5, 2xMDC/4 TU, Stealth 1, Arm
5, LAD, SUP PDS. Who needs Ogres?)
In a message dated 99-02-22 01:52:05 EST, you write:
<< We never bothered with special armour rules for Ogres. Just gave them lots
of regular DS2 armour - Arm. 7 or so...they still died. It doesn't take
twin MDC/4s long to punch thru Arm7 when at close range...those
superheavy
tanks I mentioned several posts ago. (Size 5, 2xMDC/4 TU, Stealth 1,
Arm 5, LAD, SUP PDS. Who needs Ogres?) >> Who ever does not have one of your
Super Heavy Tanks, and those seem simular
to a tank that I tried a while back. It was size 5, with TWO MDC/5 in a
TURRET on a GRAV body with ARMOUR 5, now that will make some one's day, if
supported by other tanks, (Missile, Arty, MICV, APC, ect) it will kick as*, I
hope.
-Stephen
> PERRYG1@aol.com wrote:
> << >With a bit of luck, SJ may licence another firm to do some more
> A number of weapons in Full Thrust are identified as 'genre specific',
Well, nothing is strictly off-limits, but as you say I always intended
Big
Mechs and Ogre-style modulars to MAINLY be used for players who wanted
to use DSII to play Ogre or BTech type games. That isn't to say that some
nations haven't experimented with building them in the GZG-verse (I
suspect the Japanese may well have a go at the Mechs...<grin>), but they've
been found to be relatively ineffective against cheaper and more conventional
forces, so they remain semi-experimental, limited deployment units for
use in exceptional circumstances if at all. The rationale for oversize
vehicles and mechs is firmly tied to the specific backgrounds of Ogre and BT
(and
other mecha games), in which they make sense - in a more generic
framework, they start to look silly.
No weapons systems in DSII are really genre-specific, though the SLAM
was
originally intended mainly for anime-style missile swarms.
> I recently purchased two (!) Ogres, already have a Scotia Rolling
If you've got 'em, use 'em!!
> DracSpy@aol.com wrote:
I assume you mean firm... anyway, AFAIKR, Martian Metals, then Ral Partha (by
far the most common, these last). Grenadier did some too.
> John Crimmins wrote:
> I think that I have the same figures that you do. I've got an entire
The old GW "Deathstrike" missile launcher looks quite adequate as a Cruise
Missile carrier. Ral Partha puts out a Battletech TOW cannon that looks more
like the illustrations on the counters than the official Ogre Howitzer.
The new GW stuff for Epic 40k are far better models, but too Gothic for Ogre.
> At 09:19 AM 2/22/99 +0000, you wrote:
Even in Heavy Gear, the Gears will be *toast* if they try to take on tanks on
a plain, or even slightly hilly ground. (I know. I've tried.) If they're a
tankhunting force, they'll take some tanks with them, but not nearly enough to
cover the losses you'll take.
But throw 'em in a city, or give the Gears lots of dense
forest/jungle/swamp to play around in, and they do a lot better. Of
course, what the heck is your tank doing in a swamp anyway...?
So, if you can limit your opposition to infantry (preferably without too
many IVARs ^_- ) then your walkers should do quite well. ^_-
> Aaron Teske wrote:
actually, in the bastardized version of GW 40k that I play (can't get my
friends to switch to SGII yet). I use the old scale heavy gears as infantry
walkers and the do quite well in the dense terrain that we normally play in.
Their armor is thick enough to bounce small arms and they carry heavier
weapons than the regular infantry.
> On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Christopher Pratt wrote:
> Aaron Teske wrote:
> > Even in Heavy Gear, the Gears will be *toast* if they try to take on
If
> > they're a tankhunting force, they'll take some tanks with them, but
Precisely, the Gear is for the most part an infantry fighting vehicle designed
to support...well... infantry. It just looks a lot cooler than say a Bradely
fighting vehicle.
> > But throw 'em in a city, or give the Gears lots of dense
Maybe he got lost? ;-)
> > So, if you can limit your opposition to infantry (preferably without
Now we are moving into SGII territory.
> actually, in the bastardized version of GW 40k that I play
Speaking of SGII; old Rafmm Gears are supposed to be HO scale, right? So what
size class would that make them for 25 mm. (I would say about 2.)
Later,
> Speaking of SGII; old Rafmm Gears are supposed to be HO scale,
Hi Mark,
We use Heavy Gear models (in the old scale) quite extensively in SGII. We use
most as size 1, though the larger models (ie Kodiak types and equiv) would
seem to be about size 2. They released a couple of HUGE Gears (the Mammoth
versions, and the Naga) both of which we use as size 4. One of the
Southern Gears is fitted out as a mortar carrier - makes it kind of
interesting to use as a light mortar in the infantry support role - the
Gear carries an autocannon and the mortar, so can provide both direct and
indirect support for the infantry it accompanies. I think using them as size 1
vehicles adds some real spice to the game, because they are fast enough to
cover a lot of terrain and big enough to carry decent size weapons, but light
enough that they can be taken out by infantry squads (the d12 armour can be
killed by regular rifles if the enemy foot troops
are lucky) - so not overbalancing in a playability sense. And they are
a LOT less expensive to purchase than most armoured vehicle models, so you can
add heavy support to your troops without spending a huge amount of
time/money/etc.
The Heavy Gear range included some other interesting stuff -
particularly their field artillery. Both the "North" and the "South" had a
field artillery piece that is perfect in scale to use as a towed gun with SGII
25mm figs. I have a bunch, and they are great. We've done several "attack the
artillery park" type scenarios, and because these guns are not huge, we
have also used them as direct-fire guns (like the German WWII 88mm
anti-tank field guns). They're cheap too - last ones I saw here in
Toronto were about CDN$6.00 each or so. Since these aren't produced anymore,
if you are interested you'll have to jump on a distributor to catch old stock
before it sells out.
> On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Adrian Johnson wrote:
We
> use most as size 1, though the larger models (ie Kodiak types and
I've got quite a few Northern and Southern Gear figs from when I attempted to
bring HG to my game store (no such luck). I'm thinking of
re-painting them, seeing that my first attempts turned out rather
crappy. However, since I have so many other painting projects on the my list
(Certain Evil Empire figs and my B5 minis), it will probably be a while until
I get to them. After buying BFG, I'm going to have to stop buying more figs
until I catch up with the loads of lead and plastic I don't have painted yet.
> The Heavy Gear range included some other interesting stuff -
For a time, I was seriously thinking of using HG infantry figs for SGII.
However, I decided to stick to 25mm when I found that their weren't many HO
scale wargamers. (Not many true 25mm gamers out there either). However, one of
my local gamestore still has a large number of Ratmm HG stuff left. If he
still has it after I catch up, I'll stock up.
Later,
I'm in agreement with the GW infantry. IMHO the best thing GW ever did
was the plastic Epic-scale infantry. Plastic is expensive to set up a
production run for, but dirt cheap over a long production run. I've got plenty
of both Space Marines and Imperial Guard for Dirtside. The Guard look very
good painted khaki. The space marines make outstanding power armor figs, in
scale with the armor and easy to paint (black primer, drybrush whatever color
you like).
Most of the Epic lead is, as said before, too Gothic for DSII or Ogre.
> At 1:56 AM -0800 2/22/99, Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote:
> At 12:38 PM 2/23/99 +1000, you wrote:
GW are having another 20% increase here? Did they give a reason why at all, or
just increase it?
I finally found something GW make that was semi-decent after several
years. The destroyed cathedral walls look very good, except the skulls all
over them as usual. But if they raise the price again, and just before BFG
comes out I'll go back to ignoring them again.
> --
> Michael Llaneza wrote:
I agree. So of course the price has escalated by a factor of more than 10.
With another 20% increase hitting in a few days. It's already hit 20c per 6mm
fig here. Which is bizarre.
> Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@clark.net> wrote:
It's actually based on the set up costs. Lead or pewter metal moulding
requires less work to start up than plastic moulding. Plastic moulding
requires a steel mould to made and this takes a lot of work and time to make,
so making the set up costs very high. On the other hand, the mould lasts for a
very long time, so that the per item cost over a long run will be low. Metal
moulding only requires a mould that is easy to make, so making the start up
costs low. In most cases of figure moulding, the mould is destroyed to remove
the moulded items. Each batch of metal miniatures requires a new mould which
is easily made from a master miniature. Hobby books show how to mould
miniatures using the sand casting method. I sure Jon Tuffley can explain more
about metal casting, if he wants to. Miniatures being usually low volume
items, metal moulding is the way to go for most companies. If you're making
and selling a lot of miniatures like GW, plastic moulding is the key to making
a lot of money. Hope that helps!
> At 6:51 PM -0800 2/22/99, Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
The catch with metal miniatures is that the initial molds are cheaper than
with plastics, but each run through the mold a) uses more costly materials and
b) degrades the mold slightly. Over a huge production run the more expensive
molds for plastics last longer and can be used with cheaper materials.
Plastic also has some troubles with the detail level you can get on them. Most
particularly with the level of texturing you can do. Compare GW's metal figs
with the plastics. Very few of the plastics have anything like the spiky bits
the metal ones do.
Then again, I still miss the original Mk. 6 plastic Space Marines. Possibly
the best value GW ever produced. Must be why they don't make those anymore...
Knowing next to nothing on the topic has never shut me up before, so...
My understanding is that the start up costs are the vastly different part of
molding. The machinery to inject the plastic into the molds is on the order of
hundreds of thousands of US dollars. The machined molds on the order of tens
of thousands.
I've heard that even the more expensive metal spin casters are in the
thousands of dollars; RTV for molds dozens of dollars.
Now, the metal is vastly more expensive than the plastic, but until you hit
volume necessary...
Which STILL begs the question of why no new Land Raider yet. ;->=
The_Beast
PS. Some guy with the initials of WC even was credited with design of mobile
hwz
on the blister cards I mentioned earlier. ;->=
Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrath@clark.net> on 02/22/99 08:51:36 PM
Please respond to gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
cc: (bcc: Doug Evans/CSN/UNEBR)
Subject: Re: [DSII] Genre
> Michael Llaneza wrote:
I was always curious about that. An uninformed layman would think that metal
miniatures would be more expensive to produce than plastic ones.
I guess plastic is less forgiving a medium to work with.
> At 04:24 PM 2/23/99 +1300, Andrew Martin wrote:
Work's a bit of a misnomer; mainly money.
> Plastic moulding requires a steel mould to made and this takes a
Actually, that can depend a lot on what kind of tech you've got. Hooking a CNC
up to a computer and doing some CAD work gets you a negative quite rapidly,
really. But then all your time's going into getting the CAD layout correct....
> On the other
Very, very, very long time. Unless someone drops it or jams it in the
press (used to hold the halves/parts together). Then you're in trouble.
> Metal moulding only requires a mould that is easy to make, so
Well... the rubber molds aren't completely destroyed, usually, but do start to
wear. They'll especially wear if you take advantage of rubber's ability to
bend, which does let you add more detail (i.e. a fold in a robe) that's off
the parting line, but that'll go away faster than normal.
Steel molds, on the other hand, have to get pretty fancy to add things off the
parting line of the two main halves, so I really doubt any miniatures
company does that. Which is why you make multi-part kits for plastic
items.
> Each batch of metal miniatures requires a new
...not the most efficient method for casting in metal. Though investment
casting would be *great* for high-detail, single part metal kits.
They'd just cost a couple hundred per mini. (I've wondered if I could get away
with hand-dipping a mocked-up wax miniature where I work, sending it
through the burnout line, then taking it home and casting it. But I don't
think I could get away with that. ^_^;; )
> I sure Jon Tuffley can
And if you want *really* fancy, add ceramic cores for internal detail and
leach 'em out later! <grin>
> Miniatures being usually low volume items, metal moulding is the
...after the initial investment. Big trick there. Gotta wonder where the
break-even point is....
(Hmm, okay, it's getting late. I'm goin' ta bed... sorry for the rambling,
just wanted to comment for whatever reason. ^O^)
G'night,
> Knowing next to nothing on the topic has never shut me up before, so...
My job is actually selling industrial plastics--usually stock shapes,
but occasionally we have someone who wants a molded part. Generally I figure a
cheap, simple mold for limited quantity runs will be something in the
$500-1000 range. A better mold, still fairly simple, for long term
production, will be on the order of $5000. The resin CAN be cheaper than
metal, especially styrene or polyethylene--or it can be expensive. I
had a quote today for 12 feet of 4.25" diameter rod in a specialized
material--about $10,000 per foot .
I suspect the problem is that the plastic has to be handled more delicately. I
don't imagine you're likely to burn lead if you get it a little too
hot....
The mould required for plastic miniatures are far more expensive - the
actual material is much cheaper. Hence the higher start-up cost but
lower
production costs. Metal has the advantage that any mis-casts can be
chucked back in the melting pot and used again.
> Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
> Michael Llaneza wrote:
> Laserlight wrote:
> >
No, but overheating will damage the mould.
> > Metal moulding only requires a mould that is easy to make, so
that's
> off the parting line, but that'll go away faster than normal.
We use fairly soft RTV rubber moulds, probably a bit softer than the ones Jon
uses at GZG (but easier to produce). After more than three years of use, the
first ones are starting to wear out, so I guess we've had several thousand
plus castings from each one before they've given up the ghost. The biggest
problem is, as stated above, that too much undercut detail can cause the mould
to be torn if you're not gentle enough when taking the castings out. The main
reason we've had to replace moulds is damage caused by careless handling
rather than wear.
> On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
> Michael Llaneza wrote:
i understand that the expense is in the moulds; since lead melts at quite a
low temperature, you can use a vulcanised rubber mould, and you can make that
yourself with comparatively little effort or expense. however, the lead is
expensive. now, the plastic used in minis is a thermoset, so you have to heat
it to a high temperature to get it to fuse. thus, you need steel moulds, which
are very pricey. however, the plastic is cheap.
thus, you use plastic in steel moulds for your large-volume,
low-diversity
stuff, like basic tanks and troops, and lead for the more exotic and diverse
stuff.
of course, everything GZG makes is exotic and diverse, so they only use
lead :-). well, except for the resins. i assume that resin is cheaper
than lead, but that for some reason it's no good for small minis. can anyone
explain this?
of course, i was told all this by a GW store manager, so it could all be
disinformation...
Tom
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> of course, everything GZG makes is exotic and diverse, so they only
Too fiddley, really. You'd get an exceptionally high proportion of miscasts
from a small (25mm figure / 6mm vehicle sized) mould. Plus curing time
for
resin is a factor - several hours is the norm. If you were casting your
standard models (tanks, troopers etc) you simply couldn't cast 'em quick
enough. You can't assume more than one casting per mould per day. Resin moulds
are generally (although not always) open topped, hence 25mm vehicles are cast
in two halves (top and bottom) which are glued together to hide to open
surface. Polyester resin is too brittle for fine pieces such as 6mm vehicle
gun barrels unless it's reinforced by casting wire inside, which again
increases the time taken per casting.
Pluses for resin? Well, you can get very good detail definition, better than
metal, especially from polyurethane resins which are used by historical AFV
manufacturers (although these do give off cyanide gas when curing, which is I
guess one of the reasons why Jon and GZG use polyester instead). Polyurethane
is also much more flexible then polyester - it can be carved, drilled
and cut without shattering.
> Jason Stephensen wrote:
> GW are having another 20% increase here? Did they give a reason why at
What possible reason could there be? Just the usual: stretching the boundaries
to find "All the Market will bear".
> At 7:50 AM -0800 2/23/99, Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote:
Remember, a GW customer enters middle school every minute...
> On Mon, 22 Feb 1999, Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
Resin IS cheaper than lead, but surprisingly not by as much as you'd think
(not per kilo, anyway - of course the resin is a LOT less dense, so goes
much further). The reasons resin is not used for small stuff like figures are
due to fragility, curing time (metal cools to setting point in seconds after
pouring, resin takes hours!) and a lot of technical difficulties in moulding.
Grendel tried resin 25mm figures over here a while back, and they were
spectacularly unsuccessful in the market. Resin is great for big stuff
(vehicles and buildings) but very unsuitable for gaming-size figures.
> of course, i was told all this by a GW store manager, so it could all
Actually, it's pretty accurate - you must have found the one that had
the Company Brain Cell that week.... <grin!>
> Tom
> Tony wrote:
[snip]
> Pluses for resin ? Well, you can get very good detail definition,
In a message dated 99-02-22 20:50:39 EST, you write:
<<
> I'm in agreement with the GW infantry. IMHO the best thing GW ever
I have several boxes of the "old" Imperial Guard which I use as ESU troops.
Just to try and capture what I think is the political/military culture
of the ESU I've taken a page from World War II and created "blocking" units
using mixed stands Ogeryn and Commisar figures. These are kept to the rear of
shakey troops to bolster morale.
Perry
> Polyurethane is also between five and ten times more expensive than
Polyurethane *includes* polyester. And polyether. And if you think that
gets confusing--particularly when the end user is 4 or 5 links down the
food chain, and at least two of the links are just parroting things they don't
understand....