Mantic Miniatures

[Somanlius]

Im wondering if anyone out there has used the Manitic Kings of War minis for Age of Sigmar? I really dig the Basilea miniatures and wanted to rebuild my Free People Army around them with kind of a stormcast influenced look, since that is one of my other armies. Just wondering if the Kings of War minis scale well with the GW ones, because I already have a very large Free People army and was hoping to mix and match. Thanks

[AsraiR]

With the exception of my Tomb Kings virtually all my Undead are Mantic. I love their zombies and won out with some careful bids and supporting their KS for KoW2.

Unfortunately I don't rate the Basilean plastics as the poses are far too stiff and the heads aren't great.

[bsharitt]

It definitely depends on the particular range whether or not they mesh well with GW stuff. The undead are fantastic models and mesh really well with GW stuff, but my Dwarfs on the other hand are just out of scale(mostly head size) so I can't mix and match my dwarfs, though it ended up being for  the best since now my Mantic stuff is purely KoW and I have them on multibase dioramas which are so much handier than movement trays of models. I think I've seen somebody with a KoW army that mixed Mantic and GW, and seem to recall that one or the other had bigger heads and hands  than the other and they just didn't look quite the same proportion, but I'm not 100% sure they were GW, I know they were his old WHFB army and they were very old.

[Oppenheimer]

Mantic zombies are better than the GW version.

[TheWilddog]

I know this will sound like GW snobbery but I have never seen how people can even compare Mantic figures with recent GW sculpts.  After hearing so many positive things about the undead line I bought some ghouls, skeletons and zombies.  I have to say I was nothing but disappointed.  The bits were  fiddly and the scale is very different (was particularly disappointed with the size of the skeletal catapult, that thing is tiny).   I was not happy and gave them all away to a buddy who was just starting out.  They might stack up against stuff GW was doing over a decade ago, but any of the recent GW kits are just leagues ahead.    

[Widdershins]

56 minutes ago, TheWilddog said:

I know this will sound like GW snobbery but I have never seen how people can even compare Mantic figures with recent GW sculpts.  After hearing so many positive things about the undead line I bought some ghouls, skeletons and zombies.  I have to say I was nothing but disappointed.  The bits were  fiddly and the scale is very different (was particularly disappointed with the size of the skeletal catapult, that thing is tiny).   I was not happy and gave them all away to a buddy who was just starting out.  They might stack up against stuff GW was doing over a decade ago, but any of the recent GW kits are just leagues ahead.    

That might be true, but when you are doing units of 40 skeletons Mantic wins out easily. The sculpts might not be as good, but they are good, and the price difference between 40 Mantic skeletons and 40 GW is ludicrous. Absolutely no contest.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Widdershins said:

That might be true, but when you are doing units of 40 skeletons Mantic wins out easily. The sculpts might not be as good, but they are good, and the price difference between 40 Mantic skeletons and 40 GW is ludicrous. Absolutely no contest.

It depends on the extent to which cost is a factor for you. For me, no saving is worth the pain of having to look at my army, year after year, and knowing that it's tainted by inferior Mantic miniatures. It would be a total false economy for me because I would have to live with an army that I'd put a load of time, money and effort into but didn't absolutely love.

Even the oft-mentioned zombie comparison doesn't cut it for me. I assume some people prefer the Mantic zombies because they're arguably more realistic and less stylised. But I'll defend the GW zombie kit all day because for me it's still a fun, adaptable, good value kit that just about stands up to its peers in terms of quality and still works with the rest of the range stylistically. To me, Mantic zombies are executed perfectly well but have very little character and severely limited poses.

[Widdershins]

Eh, if you want to spend a fortune on a Skeleton horde that's your choice of course. For me, the Mantic undead look almost as good and the cost proposition makes it a no brainer. I wouldn't make the argument in favour of any other Mantic stuff though (maybe the Ogres, maybe).

[Lousy Beatnik]

If you like the models, go for it. Life's too short to stick to one company when there are hundreds out there

Always check reviews for Mantic, though. The basileans in particular were pretty ordinary. Mix of sculpting, design choices and the material (when they famously chose Chinese plastic over English Renedra). If you're still into them, go for it.

[Lucio]

My problem with Mantic's products is that they tend to be very hit and miss in quality, even with the same batch. Missculpts, warped moulds and various errors make me not  want to take the chance too often. Generally I order the odd piece of terrain and the occasional character model

At least with GW products you have a guarentee of quality backed with an easy exchange policy on defects

[Moonlightwolf]

I've tried mantic models a couple of time and mostly come away unsatisfied. As many people have mentioned their plastic zombies are great, but everything else I've ever got has been medium to poor quality, often miniatures in the same armies have mixed scales, for example their black knight equivalents are tiny compared to their normal skeletons. The standard Basilea troop miniatures are alright but they have very little in the way of poses and customization, I haven't seen anything else in the Basilea range IRL but given their other ranges i would expect scale inconsistencies. If you do decide to go with them beware their metal miniatures. I've found them extremely difficult to work with and often the parts come bent or misshapen.

[Aginor]

I like the Mantic Skeletons. Actually I like some things about them better than on the GW models.

For me GW Skellies are a tiny bit better, but at more than double the price I don't see why I should play them except if I wanted to go to a tournament. I have 20 GW Skeletons and 40 from Mantic and I am happy with them. Going to buy more of both, but will keep the focus on Mantic.

[SuperHappyTime]

I've bought Zombies and Ghouls.

Pros: Cheaper for the number of models. 

Cons: Becomes apparent after the first few models that unless you start adding the bits and clipping off hands/limbs, you're gonna make the same 4/5 models over and over again. Both Zombies and Ghouls are fairly indistinguishable from each other.

The GW Zombies may be old and look awful, but I felt I could do more with them.

[Killax]

10 hours ago, TheWilddog said:

 They might stack up against stuff GW was doing over a decade ago, but any of the recent GW kits are just leagues ahead.    

Certainly, thing is though there are several armies and thus whole factions who work with models that where produced over a decade ago. 

From my expierence some of the Mantic stuff is indeed good and some isnt. As mentioned their Zombies/Ghouls look great, other stuff not so much.
Same applies to a lot of the Avatars of War range also, some characters and units they produce are awesome and easily as good as what GW produced or produces but some of it is not.

In general though the worth of this quality is really up to the specific hobbyist. Back in WFB days Ive seen some armies completely consisting out of 80's models and that looked amazing aswell for the sheer consistancy of a theme. What usually doesn't mix well is using the old and new together into one army.

[Mikester1487]

It's all personal choice but I just prefer the look of gws undead line over mantics.  I did buy 40 of the skeletons from mantic as I wanted a unit of graveguard without taking out another loan.  They don't look terrible, but gw has nailed the look and feel of age and decay on weapons and armor.  

By all means though if you're liking the models from mantic for a free people's army I'd say go for it.  If free people's are going to get another model line I'm sure it's a good while away.

[The Cranky Dwarf]

As far as manic models in general go I am a big advocate of them for people starting out or on a limited budget. The price point is damn near unbeatable (1000 pt army for 100$ vs gw costs) but I will admit they require a bit of work to look as nice as gw stuff. Now pertaining to the basileans in particular unless they changed the scale recently the spear and swordsmen are pretty large in scale compared to the rest of the range. The paladins and sisters fall more in line with the gw scale. If that doesn't scare you off I would try them out. You can pick them up pretty cheap on ebay.

Ps a good half of my dwarf army is mantic and they work fine.

[Payce]

Mantic is a budget version for non-tournament gamers. I don't say that as an insult, simply stating what I feel is the "harsh reality" of the matter. As someone who paints and models primarily, and plays secondary, to me the option of having the better-looking model always wins out. As @Jamie the Jasper points out, you have to actually like your army, how it looks, not just how it plays. There is an aesthetic value to miniature gaming that surpass that of most other gaming genres.

My own experience with Mantic is largely limited to the Forces of the Abyss Succubi, which on their own are OK models but not more, and next to the plastic Daemonettes look small and clumsy, and next to the Diaz sculpts simply look downright lazy. Sure, I got 20 models for about a euro each, but what does that matter when they'll literally end up as a stain on my army? I can understand the idea of cost, but honestly, for me, forking out another €10 or so for twenty Daemonettes and not taking a few beers or not buying a warm lunch at work a few days more than makes up for it. I'm playing Age of Sigmar to have fun, awesome games with well painted armies, not to penny-pinch.

[AthlorianStoners]

Some of their Ogre's look good as well. 

[GammaMage]

I got Basilean Panther Lancers to play as Wild Riders, but I ended up using only the panthers themselves because the rider sculpts were pretty terrible. I had to use some green stuff to close up gaps in the panthers as they didn't fit together very well. Put Sisters of the Thorns riders on them, which worked quite well.

[someone2040]

13 hours ago, Payce said:

Mantic is a budget version for non-tournament gamers.

I don't necessarily think that's the case. Plenty of tournament gamers want to play the latest 'top' army, and what better way to do it than getting budget models, especially if they're just going to be tossed away again in a month or two when they want to swap armies again.

 

As for Mantic. Personally I prefer the Warhammer aesthetics behind most of the fantasy races. So I don't really like the Dwarfs or Elves or whatever that come out of Mantic. I've painted up some of their Dungeon Saga miniatures, and material withstanding (These are more rubbery plastic due to it being a board game), pleasantly enjoyed the experience.

That being said, they are miniatures for a different style of game. Rank and flank games are ones where you don't want your miniatures waving around there arms in all kinds of directions. It's more acceptable IMO for miniatures to look more 'samey' because you're restricted in some ways by the fact you need to fit your units into particular rectangles that make up the unit.

It's also in theory, a game where you need a lot more miniatures (Although, KoW does away with that a fair bit by people multibasing), so it's probably something where you rather simplicity over having to glue together legs + body + 2 arms + head for every single miniature in the army.

 

So yeah, Mantic's fine if it's up your alley. Personally I prioritize aesthetics that appeal to me above all else. It's why I don't buy Mantic, nor have I looked at games like Hordes and War Machine, because the aesthetics of Warhammer is what appeals to me.

[Chris Tomlin]

@Somanlius - The Basilean models look pretty cool when you see them in photos, but the actual quality of the models is terrible. The sisters with the flails are the only model kit I've ever literally binned half way through assembly. They are awful. Even the foot Paladins and Angels have bent swords, slipped moulds etc. Don't get me started on the regular cav and Panther riders (both of which I have in my all Mantic High Elf army). It's just a poor quality, inferior product.

Simply put; you get what you pay for.

[Veterannoob]

No, and not even KoW events I go to usually have any Mantic models. Mostly GW or 3rd party.  

[Aegisgrimm]

I do like the metal Dwarf characters, though.  They are much better than GW proportions, what with GW dwarves having no shins.

Their Orcs remind me of the wierd ones from Gorkamorka way back in the day (the Ork gang- skirmish game with vehicles).  I much prefer the modern GW orc(k)s.

[Somanlius]

On 04/09/2017 at 4:28 AM, Chris Tomlin said:

@Somanlius - The Basilean models look pretty cool when you see them in photos, but the actual quality of the models is terrible. The sisters with the flails are the only model kit I've ever literally binned half way through assembly. They are awful. Even the foot Paladins and Angels have bent swords, slipped moulds etc. Don't get me started on the regular cav and Panther riders (both of which I have in my all Mantic High Elf army). It's just a poor quality, inferior product.

Simply put; you get what you pay for.

Hey, thanks for the description. Those were the models I was interested in, the Sisters and Paladins. I guess I'm glad I asked around first before buying a bunch.

[Chris Tomlin]

On ‎08‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 5:33 AM, Somanlius said:

Hey, thanks for the description. Those were the models I was interested in, the Sisters and Paladins. I guess I'm glad I asked around first before buying a bunch.

No worries, glad I could be of help