Why so many small separate peices

[Ravenson]

Ok is there a design or manufacturing reason for why so many of the figures have so many small pieces??    It seems like bad design to me.  

[zFiend]

I don't think there is a reason for it.

[Phinn]

I think that it is because smaller parts cool and harden faster when being molded, which makes the process shorter and thus cheaper.

[Gabbi]

The thing that makes me wonder is, why so tiny parts (separate or not) very easy to break (i.e. Death Marshal's guns blades). These are models made primarly to play with, so a bit more sturdiness would be appreciated. Also, why making so filmsy parts, chasing the extreme realism in proportions, while two coffin locks over three have  nonexistent undercuts? I would have widely preferred slightly bulkier weapons and separate (or differently oriented) locks on the coffins chains.

 

/rant over

[MasterDisaster]

I love Wyrd's models but I have to admit some of them are designed without any thought of practicality in mind or at least that's how it seems. Some of my models have broken whilst in the case where they are supposed to be safe. I've always looked after my models and some of them seem like they are designed to break in certain places. I do question the design of some models. Santiago's belt buckle being separate or Vanessa's hand for example. These seem like pointless separate parts that could have been easily made part of an existing piece. Over all it's not too bad, sometimes a little frustrating but the quality of the models is a damn sight better than some others out there. 

[Gabbi]

I agree. The overall quality of the models is great (although in various instances I may prefer older ones). But the engineering and design is often lacking on regard of everyday handling. For Lady J crew, I've ended deciding in no foam case. A magnet under the bases and a danish cookies box to stick them in. Much safer. Plus, butter cookies

[Ravenson]

I love the models and the level of detail do not get me wrong.. and I enjoy building models ( more than I like painting them as a matter of fact).   It just seems like some of then have extra pieces for no real reason and all it ends up doing is making the final model more fragile once finished and discouraging new people.   

[Math Mathonwy]

Plastic molds are rigid so you can't have undercuts. Wyrd minis are sculpted as 3D models and then some automated program breaks them into pieces for molding making sure there are no undercuts. This, however, means that you can end up with things like Yan Lo's beard.

[Requirement]

To add to what Math said: Because the molds are rigid and you can't have any undercuts, you end up in situations where if you want detail on more than one plane, you have to add a new part. If you like the highly detailed nature of most Wyrd minis, you have to embrace multiple parts. This doesn't mean there haven't been some situations that have occurred where a piece may not have been needed but on the whole, it really feels like people just want something to bitch about.

 

In response to your models being "fragile": Use plastic cement. If you ever have the pleasure of seeing how I transport my models (loosely in a briefcase, barely padded) you will see the magic of plastic cement. The only bit that ended up not being substantial enough for me was the antennae on the Skeeters, which, honestly, I'm not sure how to even attempt to correct from a model perspective.

[Vidd]

It avoids soft details where things wrap around. Math's explained it well and it's the reason I'm happy to have a hundred little pieces as opposed to some blobby details.

 

Wyrd started off as a mini-driven company so it's nice to see they kept their standards high when they shifted from metal to plastic.

[Math Mathonwy]

To add to what Math said: Because the molds are rigid and you can't have any undercuts, you end up in situations where if you want detail on more than one plane, you have to add a new part. If you like the highly detailed nature of most Wyrd minis, you have to embrace multiple parts. This doesn't mean there haven't been some situations that have occurred where a piece may not have been needed but on the whole, it really feels like people just want something to bitch about.

To be fair, Wyrd themselves were unhappy with how their models were broken down into parts and changed the service they used. If you look at Miss Ery, for example, she is what, six pieces, while Hannah is over sixty? And I don't think that Hannah is ten times better looking

[Gabbi]

To add to what Math said: Because the molds are rigid and you can't have any undercuts, you end up in situations where if you want detail on more than one plane, you have to add a new part. If you like the highly detailed nature of most Wyrd minis, you have to embrace multiple parts. This doesn't mean there haven't been some situations that have occurred where a piece may not have been needed but on the whole, it really feels like people just want something to bitch about.

 

In response to your models being "fragile": Use plastic cement. If you ever have the pleasure of seeing how I transport my models (loosely in a briefcase, barely padded) you will see the magic of plastic cement. The only bit that ended up not being substantial enough for me was the antennae on the Skeeters, which, honestly, I'm not sure how to even attempt to correct from a model perspective.

I wonder if you ever cared reading what others wrote. Death Marshals have a gun blade so thin and loosely attached to the gun, that I almost broke one by just grabbing it. It is a single piece. So glue choice doesn't matter, here.

My point was the contrast between so uselessly fine detail (a bulkier blade would have been barely noticed) and so roughly molded locks.

And yes, I know how plastic is molded and it's done with steel molds. Nonetheless, GW's miniatures have none of the forementioned problems. I suspect they use molds divided in more than two parts, but they're also better designed (i.e. keeping in mind technical limits of the molding process and material properties). For the locks, for example, it would had been sufficient to design them "orthogonal" to the "coffin's plane" to avoid any undercuts issues.

To me, it seems it's you the one who wants to "bitch about" (whatever this means).

[Requirement]

To be fair, Wyrd themselves were unhappy with how their models were broken down into parts and changed the service they used. If you look at Miss Ery, for example, she is what, six pieces, while Hannah is over sixty? And I don't think that Hannah is ten times better looking

I certainly wouldn't argue that every model has been broken down in ways that make sense...

[Bengt]

I wonder if you ever cared reading what others wrote. Death Marshals have a gun blade so thin and loosely attached to the gun, that I almost broke one by just grabbing it. It is a single piece. So glue choice doesn't matter, here.

My point was the contrast between so uselessly fine detail (a bulkier blade would have been barely noticed) and so roughly molded locks.

And yes, I know how plastic is molded and it's done with steel molds. Nonetheless, GW's miniatures have none of the forementioned problems. I suspect they use molds divided in more than two parts, but they're also better designed (i.e. keeping in mind technical limits of the molding process and material properties). For the locks, for example, it would had been sufficient to design them "orthogonal" to the "coffin's plane" to avoid any undercuts issues.

To me, it seems it's you the one who wants to "bitch about" (whatever this means).

All GW plastics I've had are made in two section moulds, and they are in quite a few pieces. Looking at this devastator kit I have lying around (this is not the ones released this month or whenever, the generation just before it), they are in 10-13 pieces depending on what weapon you are building. And there are extra optional pieces, grenades, purity seals and so on. Older kits were typically in fewer pieces but they also had a lot of mould "shadows".

 

And sure they are more robust, but that also makes them ugly in my opinion as they have really thick arms and weapons in relation to the rest of their bodies. I much rather build the models in the Wyrd style with slimmer limbs and weapons, even if they are more fragile.

 

Lazarus seems to have been made in moulds of more than two sections though.

[Grim]

too much realism over proportion

[Gabbi]

And sure they are more robust, but that also makes them ugly in my opinion as they have really thick arms and weapons in relation to the rest of their bodies. I much rather build the models in the Wyrd style with slimmer limbs and weapons, even if they are more fragile.

 

Although I prefer instead sturdiness over coolness, I totally understand your point. In fact, mind you, my point wasn't just "why making more fragile models instead of more robust ones" (which I would prefer).

It isn't even the locks themselves, painting them appropriately will mitigate the lack of undercuts, and they're quite small and in not so plain sight to be noticed immediatly.

My point is "why bother making more fragile models (thus showing a preference for the aesthetic aspect) in some parts, only to spoil it with somewhat poorly designed/molded detail somewhere else". It's just the apparent disparity in the care used.

While I would prefer the other way (solid models over better looking ones) I could understand a different choice, if it would be supported thoroughly. Hope my point it's clear now.

[-Loki-]

It isn't even the locks themselves, painting them appropriately will mitigate the lack of undercuts, and they're quite small and in not so plain sight to be noticed immediatly.

 

Depends entirely on the design of the model. A good example is the Terror Tot which is slashing down with both arms. One is crossed over the side of the body and knife over the top of the thigh. Without undercuts, this would look terrible. The model itself would need to be redesigned around the lack of undercuts.

 

There's already a model where the lack of undercuts is very visible, and painting doesn't hide it unless you're really good - Candy. The candy canes in her basket extend all the way back to her body. Sure, having the candy canes separate would have been insanely small, and I do appreciate in this instance not doing separate bits, the lack of undercuts on a dynamic model with layers of detail is very noticeable.