This has nothing to do with my dislike of Sisters of Battle. I didn’t even consider my dislike for Sisters as an army when I made my above statements.
It's a subconscious bias.... if it has anything to do with Sisters of Battle, WoC, Witch Elves, Empire or Vampire Counts it
always rears its head. In my opinion, whenever you engage with these topics, you do so with a very heavy emotional bias (even against direct evidence, up to and including mathematical evidence... i.e. Chaos Warriors).
I too have eyes in case you didn’t notice
It's an internet forum... I can't notice such a thing. For all I know, someone is reading these messages to you and describing the pictures. Or maybe you have some sort of advanced brail system.
and I get that the aesthetics aren’t entirely the same as I have acknowledged above, but my dislike for these new models is entirely due to the fact they are copying an existing concept that already has a popular range of miniatures.
Outside of the human female in flying space armour motif, the aesthetics are
completely different. I even asked
@Mrs. NIGHTBRINGER for a second opinion and she concurs.
By your logic no company outside of GW could ever sculpt armoured space females (sisters of battle), armoured space males (space marines), robots (necrons), bugs (tyranids), etc. If we extend this thinking, you should probably get rid of your WHFB Dwarfs and High Elves because they borrow too much from LOTR (or do we have to get rid of LOTR models because the WHFB models were released first, even if they were stolen from Tolkien lore).
Personally if I was designing third party miniatures, I would attempt to piggy back off of GW's prosperities (without crossing that legal copyright/trademark threshold). That's where the money is. An entirely new and original concept not tied to any pre-established IP just isn't going to sell very well. You can build a game around your models (like one page rules), but always design models in such a way that they can be used to replace GW ones. Especially with GW constantly increasing their prices. A lot of people will flock to pick up third party alternatives at a more attractive price point.
That said, I don't think these flying female models are close enough to Sisters of Battle to scratch that itch. They would make for poor stand ins because they deviate far too much aesthetically. If you're a person who really loves Sisters of Battle, these models don't capture their essence or match up to their depiction in lore.
He would, given that he partly works for WA and will always defend them.
Then it would make more sense for him to say that they are excellent Sisters of Battle alternatives. There is more money in that angle. I think he was giving his honest perspective, but we can let
@Lord-Marcus speak for himself.
And you’ve proven my point when I celebrate Mantic’s fine-looking new Tomb King models - Tomb Kings are currently discontinued, unlike Sisters of Battle which have become GW’s joint poster models, and I was celebrating the fact that Mantic actually made the effort to make TK readily available again.
I didn't prove your point. I was pre-emptively dismissing it because I already knew that would be your next move.
I celebrate Mantic’s fine-looking new Tomb King models
Those things look terrible. A very poor man's TK. You never did buy them did you?
Of course aesthetics are subjective.
I don’t even know why you’ve decided to defend these models out of the blue in the first place - they’re not Chaos Dwarfs, Chaos Warriors, Lizardmen or Tomb Kings, why should you care?
I don't care. I'm not defending these models, I'm simply stating truth. If I'm honest, I don't even really like these models.
They simply don't look anything like the Sisters of Battles outside of sharing the general theme of human female in flying space armour. It's not an act of defense on my part, but rather an attack of your mischaracterization.
