Help support TMP


"Ranking up GW's Dwarf Hammerers" Topic


2 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Warhammer Message Board

Back to the 28mm Fantasy Message Board

Back to the Fantasy Product Reviews Message Board


Areas of Interest

Fantasy

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset

Warrior Heroes: Legends


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article


Featured Workbench Article

Building the Castle Kits Egyptian Temple Entrance

Mini-Dragon tackles hundreds of pre-cast pieces to build the Temple Entrance.


Featured Book Review


Featured Movie Review


1,105 hits since 21 Apr 2017
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Baranovich21 Apr 2017 10:28 a.m. PST

Hello all.

Continuing to build my Warhammer armies, learning and relearning many things as I go through the boxed sets.

With the dwarf army near completion, my final boxed set to assemble were the Dwarf Hammerers.

I have to say, one thing that has always impressed me about GW kits is the HUGE amount of extra bits you get. I realized that with the bits left over, I could go on Ebay and just get a bunch of the GW generic dwarf body plastic component, and actually get two or three more full regiments of equipped models from the left over bits. That's really the only component that is "missing" from GW's boxed sets. They give you enough bodies to do the 10 or 20 models the kit is designed for.

But they also give you like three times as many heads, arms, weapons and shields than is needed! You're left with a lot of really cool leftovers.

The Hammerers are great-looking models. They ended up ranking up fairly easily, however you did have to be very careful with the placement of the feet so that the hammer heads did not interfere with the models to either side of them. Not a lot of leeway if you placed them too far to the left or right on the base. "Front to back" ranking (models one behind the other) was much easier. No matter what angle the hammers were placed at, they did not interfere with the models in front of them.

As such they could be ranked up in two ranks like I've shown here, and they could be ranked up in a deeper column or block formation.

Some pics:

link
link
link
link
link

ordinarybass21 Apr 2017 1:33 p.m. PST

Nice work. That's alot of Dwarves you've got there!

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.