Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I was flicking through of the WD's I had bought from my IR today and I noticed something. Adrian Wood's terrain was is it. I was astonished. It was truly horrible. My dog(Who is the best dog ever, better than any of yours.) could **** a hill of Nurgle's Rot that looks better than all of 'Adi's' terrain.
Now, we've gotten the idea that I hate Adrian's terrain. Now, I have a question.
Why is Adrian Woods' poor terrain in a WD? Shouldn't we see good terrain? Why do I also have to look at his miniatures?
Does this raise an alarm for anyone?
Who I care to not insult.
I'm just wondering why I see poor terrain in a magazine that is supposed to highlight the hobby. It just really kills my GW 'buzz'.
I mean, seriously, you know you want to see better terrain 'tutorials'. I for one do.
I remember a time when Adrian's stuff wouldn't even be brought in for a draft of WD. Bring back that time...
Chill out XenoMarines - can't agree with you that anyone is being insulted.
This thread is off to a bit of a ****e start so let's try to get to the task in hand. As far as I have seen, all the terrain for the WH and 40K bat reps in WD has been good for at least 2 years (when I started reading regular). Don't know about the 40K stuff.
There have been a few scabby models in the mag - usually marines that belong to a gamer (obviously the Eavy Metal stuff is lush). I'm thinking of a bunch of salamanders with blatant transfer lines on them and the black and white marine chapter that the Aussie bloke is making (UKWD here to clarify).
How does this compare to others opinions? All terrain good as far as I'm concerned.A pile of dog **** would be well good as Nurgle terrain, maybe a bit too good!My dog could **** a hill of Nurgle's Rot that looks better than all of 'Adi's' terrain.
Adi's stuff is of a quality that reflects what the vast majority of gamers are able to achieve by themselves. If the only pictures that appeared in WD were of the Eavy Metal team's miniatures and Mark Jones's terrain, a lot of people would give up trying after failing to match that standard (and let's face it, how many people have that level of skill?)Originally Posted by GamesmasterZ
And dude, you were being rude. There's no call for it.
WD doesnt exactly always show the good stuff much of it none the least adi woods stuff some of the stuff in there is terrible
WELL SAID, NO MORE SQUATS THEY ARE DEAD GET OVER ITOriginally Posted by artificer
I didn't see it, I don't buy WD religiously so I occasionally miss issues, I have noticed that they have dropped in 'gamer' standard work over the last few months though. Armies mostly but I guess scenery is as big a part of the hobby. It shows what real people use. It might not be as inspiring as your dog's poo (I'm never playing on a table you've organised, by the way) but it doesn't raise the alarm either- it's nice to see other peoples efforts rather than the productions of a group of full time, fully funded scenery builders.
No more NG spearmen, thanks! Now I need some pump-wagons!
mmm.. iv always found Adrian Woods stuff actually quite inspiring.. i mean i agree some of his painting isnt 'eavy metal' material, but he does do a good job of converting minis, his warbuggy conversions are what inspired me to make my old ork army o_o.. and his Gorka Morka terrain was awesome.. what kind of terrain was it you were looking at? i mean when i look in WDs i see alot of Nurgle stuff i dont like, however i see alot of ork stuff i love that other people think is stupid.. maybe his terrain just doesnt fit into your army's style..
i havent seen the terrain in question but ive certainly noticed more 'gaming' standard paint jobs appearing in the UK WD- this month for example (UKWD 314) there are some fairly poorly painted (by which i mean even worse than me!) models particularly in the Mordheim warbands section. On the flipside you have in the same magazine a showcase of Victoria Lambs stuff which is lovely.
When i used to read WD religiously (about 150 issues ago if you can believe it!) you never got anything less then Eavy Metal standard in there...personally i like this switch to more of a focus on the hobby side and a nod to the standards of the normal gamer. For example the slayer they are painting in the same issue is certainly within all but the complete novices range, the old Eavy Metal painting guides were ridiculous, you never turned out anything remotely as good as theres!
lets face it the majority of us cant be golden demon standard however hard we try
PLAN CLAN MAN!!
He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man- S. Johnson
I'm sorry, I can't agree that I like the **** they're putting in WD. I agree with the threadstarter, WD should be to showcase good stuff. If I wanted to see mediocre work, I'd look to my IR. I wouldn't pay $6.00 for the same stuff.
In WD, you're supposed to aspire to the painting and modelling level. Why are you going to lower your standards to make 'okay' terrain and paint 'okay' figures? Don't you want to paint awesome miniatures and make awesome terrain?
Answer those questions.