Well, there was certainly interesting (and, for me, completely unexpected) response to my last post. In that post I gushed over the work of Clarence, and then presented my copy of his work. I love all of the elements of this conversion, and I love all the ways they go together.
There were quite a few folks that did not like the conversion, some who hated it. I was certainly put on the back foot, feeling pushed into a defensive stance, not a place I feel anyone should be when we're talking about having fun with our toy soldiers.
I felt, therefore, it would be good to step back for a day or two, take an objective look at the constructive criticism that I've always tried to welcome, and then respond.
The general concerns about the model were as follows:
• The gun arms were too small, comically/tragically so.
• The carapace was pushed too far forward, creating a feeling of incredible overbalance.
• The exhausts were not at a corrected angle, exacerbating the feeling of the previous point.
• The legs were too long.
• The head was in danger of being "lost" underneath that large carapace.
My responses to these concerns are:
• I LOVE the look of the gun arms. Are they proportionally smaller than the original inspiration model? Yes, but I feel that this disparity is a considerable part of their charm. I'll be keeping these at the same size. Please, there is no need to labor this point ; )
• I understand the concern from a visual point of view (although in the universe of wonky physics that is the 30K/40K universe I don't think there's a "working" balance issue). I will be keeping the carapace at it's current angle, and anchor point, but I have decided to add a couple of features that hopefully will address the visual imbalance. More thoughts presented below.
• I honestly had not thought about these when building the model, so I'm alright with thinking about them a but more, probably taking the time to rebuild the exhaust pipes.
• I'll be taking a closer look at this. There might be 5-10mm I could cut from the thighs that would address the issue.
• I want to go with the smooth, black glassy look that I've used on some of my other Mechanicum models (the Thallax and the big combat servitors). This will need to be framed well. More thoughts presented below.
Two thoughts on my adjustment to address concerns on visual imbalance are:
• Make an addition to the structure of the Warden's torso, building it to follow other lines already in place. As it wouldn't be a part of the armor plating, it would have quite a utilitarian feel, with rivets and anchor points, much like the superstructure of the Warden itself.
• At least one, but more likely two, campaign banner hanging from a horizontal pole(s) extending from the back of the Warden. As these pilots are the older, grizzled veterans of hundreds of campaigns, it seems there'd be plenty of opportunity to go to town on many fun elements here. The bonus would be seeing they way it filled out the "gap" caused by tilting the carapace forward.
As the Warden doesn't have the shield or heavy stubber of the Paladin or Errant, I thought it would be a good idea to frame the dark/black faceplate with lighter/white banners. I think there are a lot of things I can do with these that can guide the eye to the "soulless" mask and ensure it doesn't get lost in the rest of the paint job.
I may be opening myself up for another round of criticism, but I'm ok with that, as long as it is constructive. It's how we can evolve and improve, right?
Cheers
Dave
I like the idea of the extended structure, though to be honest, I don't feel like it looks unbalanced right now - more like aggressive. The banners are a good idea for framing the "face" too.
ReplyDeleteThanks Zab. I understand those who think it appears imbalanced, and as I'm not willing to make the changes they've suggested, I'm exploring other options.
DeleteExtended struture is a good thing but maybe turning the exhausts backwards would be enough?
ReplyDeleteIn the end it is all a matter of taste so as long as you're happy with the model, it's a good one.
Thanks for that. I'll start with the exhausts and see if more changes are needed.
DeleteI really think the framing the head with banners will improve this model hugely. Other edits look like they are moving in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteThe thing about feedback is you have to sort the good from the bad, but all feedback is valuable because it makes you reconsider your work from other people's perspectives. That said, internet comments can be rather harsh because there is no face-to-face interaction (if they were, people would be a lot more polite).
I think this model is going to look amazing once done. Go, Dave, go!
Thanks Tim ; )
DeleteSo, I've been following this, but didn't weigh in, because once someone puts a certain level of critique to us as modelers, that we feel like digging in and getting defensive, we tend to be less receptive to ideas. Also, I saw what I didn't like, but hadn't figured out my solution to it yet. ;)
ReplyDeleteAnywho, here's a wall of text for you to climb at your leisure:
I'm less concerned about the arm guns right now, and I don't think that's where the biggest proportion issues are - I think if you change a couple of other things, the arms are likely to pop up less on people's radar.
First, as the knights are typically grand and flamboyant, I'd concur with the campaign banners on the front, framing the face.
Onto my issues/solutions.
1) the torso pitch. I think angling from the stock kit's waist doomed the result. I like the added hydraulics in the back, and propose keeping them, but instead of angling the torso point, get rid of the stock chest piece and slide the whole torso back so that the front arch of the metal frame runs roughly parallel to the circular shape of the hip joints. Support it by returning the original torso ball joins to full contact, and fill out the underside of the metal skeleton to your liking once you have the torso at the angle you want it. That reestablishes your center of gravity and gives you the angle you're going for. Based on this, I'd say you probably don't need to extend the carapace, but would recommend turning the exhausts around so that they run perpendicular to the ground - something about that just looks proper to me.
2) Is actually the missile launcher. It looks tacked on in a bad way. Not your fault; I know the inspiration model also has a tacked on look, but sometimes taking a look at how you can update an adaptation can make it better than the original. I propose cutting out a section of the top armor, and recessing the elevation gears into the skeleton somewhat, so that it loses a little height, but when you look down on the model you can still easily see those parts - I feel like the visibility of the innards with partial obscurement by armor plates is what really makes the knight look so cool.
Hopefully this stuff makes sense and helps. :)
Thanks for that wall of text Brandon. As I've already mentioned I won't be readjusting the angle/pitch of the carapace or its anchor points (and "doomed" sounds a little melodramatic), but the exhausts will be one of the first adjustments on the list. I hadn't considered anything else for the missile launcher, but I think your suggestions are interesting. I may have to revisit that as changes progress, thanks : )
DeleteDoomed was just my way of staying "grimdark". You know how it is. :)
DeleteThe angling doesn't look bad - it just opens itself up as it's more pronounced from some angles. I can see the initial conversion, and don't begrudge you not wanting to hack it apart. That said, if you decide to extend the carapace and still recess the missile launcher, I think that would really finish the look nicely.
Looking at the missile launcher, if you tied a couple pistons into the top/back end of the side supports and placed their ends onto the carapace extension you're considering, then it would realistically bulk up the addition and lose that "tacked on" feel, without having to drop the mount. Having it up high like makes it look like the missile can be pointed straight down the carapace to fire at the Warden's feet, adding to the general menace of the model.
DeleteDave
ReplyDeleteI saw the first one post and loved what you've done. As soon as the Knights were rumoured, I wondered how easy it would be to recreate the original imperial knights from Space Marine. Perhaps because you are at the top end of the modelling game and used to big plaudits you haven't had harsh criticism for a while!
I reckon just ignore and crack on - I want to see a warden using the tractor unit from a Lord of Skulls...
Thanks Anon, I've also been considering a Warden on a tracked unit. I just need to find one the right size. I'm a bit worried the LoS would be too big.
DeleteThe original warden was certainly one of the goofiest designs ever, so I did actually relish your approach of translating that design into something at once more "realistic" for lack a better word, and in line with the stock Knight kit.
ReplyDeleteThat said, while I don't share the criticism you outlined, I do think the extended structure on the back and campaign banners are awesome ideas! And while I would have preferred a head with more of a face, so to speak, I can appreciate your attempt at creating some visual consistency via the glossy black plane.
There's one nitpick that hasn't been addressed at all, though, and that is that the way the carapace is aligned means that the hatch leading to the pilot's compartment could actually be seen as some kind of faceplate (which it definitely isn't meant to be, right?). Maybe you should mask the hatch or cover it up a bit, so as not to make it seem abiguous.
Beyond that, it's an amitious and fun project, and the fact so many people feel strongly about it (either way) should, if anything, show you that you're doing something right (and relevant) ;)
And after all, Dave, that's what it's like for us less talented hobbyists all the time ;) Only kidding ;)
Thanks mate. I think the glassy hatch "issue" can be dealt with as part of the painting. I have a few ideas prepared for how that aspect will work.
DeleteLooks great. Sure, the arms could extend a bit more so that left and right guns could converge their fire but they're fine. I must say that the extensions on the back are a cool addition but it looks fine as is. Overall, you've captured the feel of the Warden without its goofiness. I wouldn't bother about the legs.
ReplyDeleteThanks Hudson. Understood on the converging fire, perhaps it's another element to consider.
Delete40k is a strange and psychotic universe, and most of the vehicles and machines made by mankind are kind of goofy and don't make any sense. I find a lot of that to be a big part of its appeal. I prefer the charm of clunky and crazy over sleek and sexy.
ReplyDeleteI think your Knight Warden hit true to that 40k-ness, and I really dig it.
The only difference I could think that would make it look a little better, at least to me, is if the legs were a little wider and came up higher on the model. It's a little tall compared to the original model you're going after, so something a bit more squat would be nice.
As is, though, I think it looks rad and different. I think it's true to 40k and is well executed. Some people aren't hip to the 40k aesthetic of atomic supermen discovering old blueprints and building them for religious reasons, but I think you get what 40k is about and this model seems to reflect that.
Thanks Casey : )
DeleteI love this model. It definetly looks odd, but to me that adds to its charm. Looking forward to the changes, as i do think they will improve an already great model. It looks like a big beetle. :)
ReplyDeleteThanks AJ : )
DeleteStick with what you love Dave, who's going to get the most enjoyment from this conversion? Us, or you?
ReplyDeleteIf it were a teenage daughter you'd tell them they are perfect the way they were made :-)
Thanks Mark. True about the daughter, but when it's just a little plastic dude, the opportunity to tinker is right there ; )
DeleteLOL... Sorry about all this, Dave. All I've had were positive comments, but I don't get nearly the traffic you do! Certainly I think every one who had complaints have valid opinions, but I like the way mine turned out. It IS top heavy, but I've seen the same complaints about the stock knight build. I wanted to make the legs shorter too but when I started playing around with ways to do this nothing seemed to work to me. Removing the thigh sections might make an awkward model look even weirder... I thought about leaving out the hip section and attaching the legs to the carapace.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, no one takes this stuff less seriously than I do. My warden will spend more time in my display case than on the field and it looks cool towering behind my Red Scorpions.
Sorry, again... ; )
Why are you apologizing? No need to at all. I'm so very glad you built that Warden : )
DeleteSomeone beat me to my suggestion in the above posts so I will just second his thoughts, reverse the angle of the exhausts and see how it looks before extending the carapace. I think it will negate a great deal of the leaning forward effect. The banners beside the head would look great.
ReplyDeleteI started playing space marine because of the knight models, after seeing the wardens you and Mr Harrison have done I may try one myself. Thanks for sharing them.
Thanks Ron : )
DeletePersonally, I love your effort, as I did Clarence's.
ReplyDeleteMy comment on Clarence's blog was only that if I were doing it, I would remove the window on, and fill in the gaps, to get rid of the front hatch so the front presents just a plain armoured surface.
I would also try to angle the exhausts vertically (I don't have the kit yet, so I don't know how hard that would be).
Otherwise, it's great, though the proposed banners will only make it look better if anything.
Keep it up.
Thanks George. Exhausts will be early on the list of adjustments, and the banners will be just plain fun : )
DeleteI do not agree with any of the criticism. I even like that the exhausts angle forward. As soon as I buy a third Knight for my primary detachment, I would love to pick up an extra kit and give this a go. Would be very proud to field one.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I think the "off balance" look of it makes it very similar to the original design...
I say blow a resounding raspberry at critics and be proud of what you have put together.
Thanks Anon. It's always a tough thing when you are comfortable and confident in your work. Constructive criticism from folks you can respect, however, can help nudge (shove) you towards something better. I'd like to encourage constructive criticism of my work. I just need to be better prepared for it ; )
DeleteAll in all I would say you have handled it well, though this article suggests that you took some of it to heart. While I agree that constructive criticism can motivate you, the gaming forums quite often cross the line and proceed well beyond constructive.
DeleteAgain I say, good work. I would be proud to have done what you have on this project. For the record, I think that part of being prepared is establishing the "raspberry threshold". I quite like that on a couple of the points of contention you simple said I like it and "ptptptpt" if you don't.
Everyone has an opinion. I think it speaks volumes that you wanted to address these 'issues' that have been presented. The most important thing people need to remember is that, this is a conversion. Not to mention a re-imagining of a old funky model, which at some point GW will re-imagine themselves. Dave followed someone else extremely creative guide and gave it some extra flare. The purpose of any conversion is to make something that currently doesn't exist. Even brand new models or remakes of the old wont always please people. I think it is a great conversion. Maybe it is lurching a little bit to forward, or or its exhaust isn't 'correct', but some things are not worth the trouble or time.
ReplyDeleteOn the topic of your suggestions, I agree that you should add some nice heraldry banners, framing in the face. But I guess it depends if you want the knight to be an aligned with mechanicus, or if you want it to 'be' a mechanicus knight. (I am not sure they are too keen on heraldry and flamboyancy)
Thanks Matt. I think they'll be a house aligned with the Mechanicum (and connected with Legio Crucius) but they still retain a bit of their own flair. Personal heraldry might not be too evident, but personal accolades/records might be more so. Tghanks for prompting additional considerations : )
DeleteI disagree with the criticism. I love your rendition. It's nice to see your positive response as well.
ReplyDeleteThanks Steve. We're all passionate about what we do, and I know sometimes I need to step back to get the right perspective. I'm glad I was able to do it with this project/response.
DeleteI don't get it, you made this model for yourself yeah? Then why do you feel the need to "defend" yourself?
ReplyDeleteJust make what you like, take onboard the critiques you receive about it & continue doing what you like.
Don't worry about trying to please your fan base?
I guess it's a matter of ensuring there's a discussion. I like that folks who comment on this blog can prompt me to think of things in a different way, or suggest something I'd never normally have considered (for example I'm really jazzed to put the campaign banners together for this Warden). Not engaging can mean that those suggestions start to dry up.
DeleteThe defensive feelings came about from the initial burst of "negative" comments and the smattering of completely UN-constructive criticisms.
Yep, I built this for me to enjoy. I also enjoy engaging with the broader hobby community. My blog helps me do both. I hope that helps explain why I felt like I did and have responded the way I have : )
I think it looks awesome and evokes the look and feel of the classic mini perfectly! I love it. So much so, I bookmarked your original link in case I ever get round to building one myself. I'll certainly watch your further posts for updates. I think the exhausts and extended carapace (as well as framing banners) sound excellent and I see sense in Brandon's input regarding the missile launcher.
ReplyDeleteIn any event, I like the conversion as is.
Cheers,
Grim
I saw your last post about this Dave. I didn't say anything about it then because I never much liked the original model of the Warden. Your conversion of the Knight into a warden is extremely well done and I can give nothing but praise for your efforts. But... still... it's a warden... There's a review sight I listen to and the guy did a review of an Star Trek Voyager episode that he described as talking about a 7 layer tiered wedding cake that's made out of fecal matter. It's a very impressive accomplishment, honestly a master piece in many ways. But the fact remains that it's made out of fecal matter.
ReplyDeleteKind of the same point here. Once again, you have done an outstanding job with the conversion and I see some great ideas that I'll probably try and copy myself should they ever be needed.
But the fact remains that it's a warden...
The Knight Warden is a silly looking model anyway, your translation of it to 40k scale (as well as the guy who originally made the conversion) did a great job. It looks awkward and ridiculous for a Knight, sure, but I rather like it!
ReplyDeleteI like the torso-extension solution; it's a step in the right direction, and does a lot more to balance out the model visually (and I'm sure physically, if it's ever facing downhill). I don't mind it riding on taller legs or a thinner pelvis because it goes with the updated style anyway.
ReplyDelete(Of course, if you're going to cut down the legs for length, reposing them in a bent "brace" pose would go a long way to making them look more squat...)
I think the arms are fine (as long as there's plenty of swivel room for those gimbals); I was always under the impression that the missile drum was its main weapon anyway. On the epic model it's a lot larger of a drum, while the Valkyrie launcher's a bit understated. Maybe something more Nebelwerfer-styled?
I'll get it right in a moment!! I really quite like the model and don't for the life of me understand the tone of some of the criticisms you received but I think most seemed at least constructive. Frankly if it looked exactly like the epic model it would look a little sh*t - updating of old designs is what makes forgeworld so succesful.
ReplyDeleteNot sure if you've adjusted exhausts yet but on my knight I've used the gaps in the carapace for the exhaust to mount some AA autocannons. In doing so I have mounted the exhausts coming out the rear of the model - the slight curve of the exhausts matches the the curvature of the carapace. Looking at your warden I just thought it may look even better since it would frame the extended skeleton you're proposing quite well. Given the original warden didn't have exhausts on top it wouldn't conflict here and your could perhaps use the carapace gaps to mount some targetting optics.
Anyway, just some ideas. Great work though
Brother, I think the it may be better to instead of being startled by criticism, realize that not everyone will share the same tastes and that, at the very least, _they enjoy your work enough to follow and comment on it_.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a fan of the circular missile pods. They just aren't my taste and I much prefer FW's flattened titan launcher or GW's boxy launchers. But as for the conversion itself, I love it. It reminds me of Big Zam.
Maybe it's just too drastically different for some peoples' tastes and they expected something more humanoid. Or maybe they don't like the large carapace, small limbs aesthetic. It's a valid design choice.
I personally think a much larger and intimidating top-mounted weapon would work very well on this aesthetic. Think the old Armorcast Tyranid units. It would also go a long way to justify the smaller weapon arms and exaggerated torso.
I don't see how this conversion is any "worse" a design than the official Dreadnoughts or Sentinels, which are both awesome.
It wasn't that there was criticism that startled me, but the vehemence of some of it. Opinions that are presented as opinions are fine, but opinions stated as fact… not so much. Your thoughts/suggestions, for example, were well phrased, and for that I thank you : )
DeleteA thought on the smokestacks/exhausts. Replace them with some kind of missile launcher assemblies retaining the current angle. Add exhausts to the rear (like a dreadnought powerplant) helping to balance the feeling of forward motion given by the carapace position. Obviously this would likely mean the removal of the missile pod on top of the carapace.
ReplyDeleteFrankly it looks cool as is.
Cheers
Most folks offering up "constructive" criticism probably don't even paint their models anyway and play all games with WAAC lists, so to Hades with 'em.
ReplyDeleteDave I like the model you have created. All of these early models are unfamiliar to me as I found 40k mid 3rd edition. Great work so far. My opinion on the arms goes this way. Keep them small like they are but add some extensions to being them off of the frame a bit like I had seen in the original Warden picture you had posted. That's all I would do if it were mine and I had your talent. I will enjoy watching your progress regardless of what changes you do or don't make. I had posted an army list for review on Bolter and Chainsword about 2 weeks ago and needless to say others felt it was no good. I'm with you in I accept the criticism but no need to be down right killing folks with your comments. Keep going and continue to enjoy this great hobby of ours.
ReplyDeleteNot a fan of the design overall, but I don't think that my opinion should be a factor in your hobby fun.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore I came to this blog to see crazy kitbashes and paint like this, doesn't matter that I wouldn't want to field one in my army.
I like most of it but I think the mounting brackets for the rocket launcher are a little too flimsy for such a massive piece.
One the plus side, hanging two campaign banners from the shoulders is brilliant!
Well Dave, I for one apologise if my delivery was a bit terse. I'd like to stress that while I didn't like it as a Knight Warden, I still thought it was an interesting conversion.
ReplyDeleteI think Cornumortem above me sums it up nicely, I come here to see your amazing work and what you can do with converting one thing into another, and you generally succeed quite well. It doesn't matter if I, or anyone else, would want one in our army, as long as it's fun for you!
It's just the downfall of putting your work onto a public stage, every once in a while you'll either do something that isn't great or someone will dislike what you've done even if you love it... and then you feel like you've been punched in the feels.
I'm also pretty sure that nearly everyone who commented negatively didn't mean to hurt your feelings about it in any way, and that it mostly boils down to text is quite often a horrible way to communicate, especially with criticism, as there's no way to judge tone, and interaction is slow at best.
So, really, for my part Dave, I am sorry if anything I said came across overtly negative or hurtful, it wasn't my intention, I was just being my normal, brief self.
Dave,
ReplyDeleteI think Tim summed up the problem best in his comment way up above..."Internet comments can be rather harsh because there is no face-to-face interaction (if they were, people would be a lot more polite)."
I'll go further than that...in my opinion (and that's all it is), some people use anonymity as an excuse to be asshats, just because they can. You see it on every on-line forum nowadays, in my experience.
I think that once they play this card, you're perfectly justified in ignoring the rest of their so-called "feedback."
Personally, love your work, and have been a fan since WD days - keep it up.