Time to Procure a Valkyrie

Posted by MikeD 
The printing (the girlies I asume you're talking about) are stickers that come with the special edition (along with a stand). There's a regular version without them if I am correct.

And if the sexy girl markings are permanent. So what? Are you that much of a prude that they bother you?

--------------------------------------------------------------

I asked if I have "Time For L-Gaim" but I got "No Reply From The Wind".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/2010 02:17PM by Vincent Z..
Sanjeev (Admin)
They definitely look like printings to me, not stickers. They sorta conform to little dips & stuff in the surfaces. And I'm *sure* a little acetone or something like that will take 'em off. But I guess if there's a "regular" version, that'd be the way to go...whatever's cheaper, I guess.


Vincent Z. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And if the sexy girl markings are permanent. So
> what? Are you that much of a prude that they
> bother you?

Do you ever wonder why you're alone?
I wouldn't mind the girly stickers/prints if they replaced the mouth paint and the image itself was nicer looking. The overlap is tacky as hell. Though I'm sure a whole buncha modelers will custom this thing up and cover it in anime girls.
Explain to me what's morally wrong with the stickers Sanjeev?

--------------------------------------------------------------

I asked if I have "Time For L-Gaim" but I got "No Reply From The Wind".
Sanjeev (Admin)
Explain to me the last time you got laid Vincent?












(haha...I'm sorry...I just can't help it!!)
MSW
LOL! You guys are funny :)
[www.amiami.jp]

See? It's a sticker, so you don't have to worry about offending women.

--------------------------------------------------------------

I asked if I have "Time For L-Gaim" but I got "No Reply From The Wind".
Just got my Sanjeev approved non-girly König Monster. Hope to compare it with the old Yamato version tonight. :-)
Sanjeev (Admin)
MSW Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOL! You guys are funny :)


Oh, don't encourage us!

:P

Nah, Vinnie knows I love the lil spud!

drif, look forward to the comparison...but based on what many folks said about the Yamato version, I'm guessing the Bandai'll steal the show...
Sanjeev Wrote:
> drif, look forward to the comparison...but based
> on what many folks said about the Yamato version,
> I'm guessing the Bandai'll steal the show...

Two words: DETENDED JOINTS
Hear that? It's the click of death for Yamato's VB-6. This TOY is just a joy to play with. I'm lovin' it.
• Excellent fit and finish
• Gorgeous detailing
• Diecast where it counts
• Well thought out joints and linkages
• Sturdy in all modes w/o need for stand
• DETENTED JOINTS for crying out loud!!!

The Yamato VB-6 is hereby banished to the storeroom of models-pretending-to-be-toys.

Good night.
So, which version comes with Monster-girl-Ranka?

--
SilhouetteFormula.Net
thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, which version comes with Monster-girl-Ranka?

The standard version comes with Monster Girl Ranka stickers.

The SP version comes with Sheryl noseart painted on already.
So is this the same size as the Yamato one?

--------------------------------------------------------------

I asked if I have "Time For L-Gaim" but I got "No Reply From The Wind".
Slightly smaller.

EDIT:




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2010 06:06PM by Hellequin.
Hellequin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> thomas Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So, which version comes with
> Monster-girl-Ranka?
>
> The standard version comes with Monster Girl Ranka
> stickers.
>
> The SP version comes with Sheryl noseart painted
> on already.
but is the noseart rub resistant? for uh... no reason..
Anonymous User
I just picked my DX Konig Monster up 2 days ago and having owned the Yamato version as well, I'm in total agreement with Drif! This one certainly blows the Yammie version out of the water in all categories. And I welcome the smaller size too - it's just right for me, in fact.

This is truly a toy you can play with. I LOVE the rachet joints - they added so much sturdiness to the toy. You can shake the toy about (not too hard of course) and the limbs will not go all over the place. Everything is nice and tight. Even joints without rachets are tight as well. Posing the toy is no problem at all because the joints add a great deal of stability.

Diecast, as Drif said, is used in places where they should - mainly the joints. Having said that, although the toy has a mostly plastic outer shell, you'd be amazed at how heavy it is. It's a lot heavier than the VF-25 and VF-27, and you can be sure they certainly used a lot more diecast on this guy.

My only complaint is that the gun turret below the nose in the 'gerwalk' mode is extremely difficult to pull out. I just gave up for fear of breaking something, although it looks durable enough to withstand the force.

Anyway - in all, I think this is definitely one of my best purchases this year. I strongly recommend this to all, especially those sitting on the sidelines. :)

Now I wish they'd do a DX VF-17(?) with the fast packs. Or a DX SDF (it WAS featured in Frontier after all, wasn't it?)!
Amuro-Ray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> My only complaint is that the gun turret below the
> nose in the 'gerwalk' mode is extremely difficult
> to pull out. I just gave up for fear of breaking
> something, although it looks durable enough to
> withstand the force.

The nose turret caught me off guard, because you don't actually pull it out at all. The entire hip assembly slides down out of the nose and the turret goes with it. it was pretty shocking when it happened entirely by accident the first time I did it.
Just collected my Monster from the P.O. The box it came in was huge and I was a bit surprised to discover that the Monster's box could fit at least three times in the HLJ box...

I had some trouble separating the knee pads(?) (those parts that fold over the front of the upper legs) from the rest of the legs, as the tabs holding them in were very tight. Used the tip of some scissors to pry them out. The detended joints are great, except that one of the shoulders hasn't been tightened enough. Looks like it's just four screws I need to remove to tighten it, so I'll do that later. The Monster's size is satisfactory, and it can stand on its own. So the stand's kind of useless, except for shuttle mode.

BTW, the Ranka stickers are less Pedobaity than expected. She *IS* wearing a bikini bottom (there's a very thin line visible). Now I just need a good still from the anime to know where to apply her, as the instructions are kind of vague. The Monster's eyes are also included as stickers, BTW.

--
SilhouetteFormula.Net
[www.moeyo.com]

Shiny!

--------------------------------------------------------------

I asked if I have "Time For L-Gaim" but I got "No Reply From The Wind".
Vincent Z. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [www.moeyo.com]
> -klang_armored.html
>
> Shiny!

Okay, if people have not been warned yet by the "moe" in the URL, it's a fixed pose figure of Klanklan with Valkyrie bits attached. However, the photograph seems to have had some creepy obsession with her crotch, seeing the multitude of crotch shots. Also, three boob-pictures from almost indiscernible angles.

And it really needs a NSFW warning.

--
SilhouetteFormula.Net
I'm too lazy to look this up, but didn't someone design add-on parts to fill in the gaps in the shoulder areas on the newer 1:60 Yamato Valks? Were they any good?
Sanjeev (Admin)
Kinda surprised this seemed to fly under people's radars:
[www.collectiondx.com]

I am happy with my old Bandai 1/65 toy...but I'm really looking forward to when Yamato gets around to it.

And speaking of which, any word on Yamato's Fire Valk? I need to get my charging heart of love on, damnit.
who cares about what that guy says about Valkyrie toys
VF5SS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> who cares about what that guy says about Valkyrie
> toys

Honestly? I never liked that guy.

Introducing Prometheus Rising Studio.
[prometheusrising.net]
I make 3D printed mecha action figures.
CDX would be way better if that Sentai reviewer just did everything
Sanjeev (Admin)
VF5SS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CDX would be way better if that Sentai reviewer
> just did everything


^^ Hilarious!
Gcrush Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm too lazy to look this up, but didn't someone
> design add-on parts to fill in the gaps in the
> shoulder areas on the newer 1:60 Yamato Valks?
> Were they any good?


I found the parts I was thinking of. I guess they came with the VF-1J missile-armor thing.

Did Yamato start including these with all the Valks? Can you get them separately?




Sanjeev (Admin)
Oh gods...why???

Those look SO terrible...far worse than the gaps without 'em. Maybe if they molded them in the same color as the fucking Valk...they'd be moderately acceptable. But now...echht...
Anonymous User
There were some people on Macrossworld that were recasting them. Not sure if they are still available.
Sanjeev Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Those look SO terrible...far worse than the gaps
> without 'em. Maybe if they molded them in the same
> color as the fucking Valk...they'd be moderately
> acceptable. But now...echht...


I thought the same thing at first, then I started thinking about the different color. If you think about it, the surface area of the plane is going to be different from the robot - especially around the center mass since the damn thing is basically folding itself inside-out to make the limbs. So as the plane transforms the surface separates and reveals the mechanical guts inside. Which would look different because they're not primed and painted like the skin of the plane. Right?

But, yeah. They'd still look more cohesive in matching tones.
Sanjeev (Admin)
Once again, you've blinded me with science. Damn you.

Still, try to snag some in the same color. They'd look hawter.
Gcrush Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I thought the same thing at first, then I started
> thinking about the different color. If you think
> about it, the surface area of the plane is going
> to be different from the robot - especially around
> the center mass since the damn thing is basically
> folding itself inside-out to make the limbs. So
> as the plane transforms the surface separates and
> reveals the mechanical guts inside. Which would
> look different because they're not primed and
> painted like the skin of the plane. Right?

Wrong. Any part of the aircraft regularly exposed to the elements, especially in a maritime setting with all of the salt air, would have some sort of corrosion control (paint) applied wherever possible. Good maintenance practices. White would be a better choice of color in this case because it would make the surface color more homogeneous, making it harder to spot, and harder for the enemy to single out vulnerable areas. On superhornets, the internal av bays, engine compartments (they're just called doors) and every other internal surface panel are glossy white to provide contrast against leaks, grease, debris, cracks, ruptures etc. This is a different color than the skin of the jets, but then superhornets don't turn themselves inside out either. If they did, it would only make sense that the insides matched the outsides. Tactical before practical. Sanjeev is right, they look terrible, and the color choice is also really stupid. Of course, white ones installed inside a grey or any other colored valk, although more authentic, would look even worse, so I can see why Yamato would choose to mold them in that shade of grey if they only intended to cast them once.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/31/2010 03:33PM by Warrhead.
The grey also makes the shoulder hinges stand out in a really ugly way. Stupid.
B00
What's up with that 1j being 2 different colors? White on the joints and head and off-white on the chest and back plate.

__________________
MoonBaseTom Season tickets available. Call now.
Warrhead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wrong. Tactical before practical.


Uh, at what point would we consider a valk's paint scheme a tactical decision? When they were picking what primary color they wanted for accent marks and pin-striping, or when they decided that a color like white would be a good "low-contrast" choice against the backdrop of outer space?

Yeah, metal needs to be protected against corrosion. But you can't prime and paint a surface where there's metal-on metal action in a joint. Those areas need to be lubricated. Your superhornet compartment doors can be white on the inside, but the engine itself won't be.




If anything, valks should have a lot more exposed metal on them. Like, at pretty much every one of their joints.

Then again, in a universe where transforming a plane into a humanoid robot is both a) possible and b) desirable, I guess they have the technology to manufacture metal in whatever color they want. So, yeah, valks should be all white. Even in their guts.

Still, you'd think that in a world with giant laser guns, transforming outer-space aircraft carriers, and protocultured yogurt they'd base their transforming white skinned robots on something other than cutting edge 1960s American aerospace engineering...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2010 08:27AM by Gcrush.
Attachments:
open | download - 2633d00f85d8397cf0410fdf241c_grande.jpg (30.7 KB)
I read somewhere that they painted the Valks white in an attempt to scare the Zenrtraedi into thinking they were being attacked by ghosts.

Introducing Prometheus Rising Studio.
[prometheusrising.net]
I make 3D printed mecha action figures.
Sanjeev (Admin)
Gcrush Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Still, you'd think that...they'd base
> their transforming white skinned robots on
> something other than cutting edge 1960s American
> aerospace engineering...


Well, actually, the F14 flew in the 70's. But anyway, shit was fun back then. Dogfights, man!

The next generation of fighters in the real world aren't gonna have pilots. Where's the fun in that??? :P
Sanjeev Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, actually, the F14 flew in the 70's. But
> anyway, shit was fun back then. Dogfights, man!

Yeah, but flying in 1970 means designed in the late 60s.


> The next generation of fighters in the real world
> aren't gonna have pilots. Where's the fun in
> that???

True. We won't have films appropriately celebrating the homoerotic tension of "men in extreme situations while protecting our country". Instead we'll get shit like Stealth which emphasizes the, uh, antagonistic love triangles between humans and other humans and technology? I'm not even sure what the romantic undertones of that film were representing. All I know is that I didn't like it. Longing glances between people and computer screens aren't titillating, they're depressing. Like watching some guy watch porn on his laptop while trying to stop the bad guy. Terrible.
Gcrush Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Warrhead Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Wrong. Tactical before practical.
>
>
> Uh, at what point would we consider a valk's paint
> scheme a tactical decision? When they were
> picking what primary color they wanted for accent
> marks and pin-striping, or when they decided that
> a color like white would be a good "low-contrast"
> choice against the backdrop of outer space?

I agree, white and red pinstripes isn't the best color scheme, but then something that was built to fight in space where there is little light could probably be painted white without too much visibility. The heat signature out there would probably be spotted long before a white spot in a sea of white spots. Closer up, it would still be better to keep the whole thing white. Big glaring grey guts against a white background kind of tell the shooter "aim for these parts!" A homogeenous color scheme still breaks up a vessel's details better than parts of varying colors.

But then there is also command pride. Our show bird number 100 was painted with more contrasting colors than Hikaru's VF-1J, so there are still reasons to paint a fighter in impractical colors. The rest of the birds are painted haze grey though. Tactically painted or not, the show bird still flew in-country and engaged enemy targets.



> Yeah, metal needs to be protected against
> corrosion. But you can't prime and paint a
> surface where there's metal-on metal action in a
> joint. Those areas need to be lubricated. Your
> superhornet compartment doors can be white on the
> inside, but the engine itself won't be.
>
> [toyboxdx.com]

You would be surprised how many moving parts in a superhornet are still painted. The picture you added is a jet engine, and of course you wouldn't paint that. You weren't talking about an engine though, which is always concealed, you were talking about big flat panels that sit under the arms. Those absolutely would be painted. Landing gear struts, actuators, panels, just about everything that can be painted is. Yeah, the push rods for control surfaces and metal on metal parts are not painted, but they are in housings that are painted, and are rarely visible.

> If anything, valks should have a lot more exposed
> metal on them. Like, at pretty much every one of
> their joints.

If you ever get a chance, look at a landing gear actuator assembly on a fighter (perhaps an air show) and you will see that it is almost completely painted. I keep using that as an example because these parts are the closest thing to legs, or any other part that moves in the way that I think you are describing. They move regularly and bear the vessel's entire weight. Lots of moving parts that all appear to be painted, but internally, they are metal on metal. Anywhere there isn't paint, there is lube. You see very little of the metal.

If anything, valks would probably be made of a lot more composite materials.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2010 02:39PM by Warrhead.
Attachments:
open | download - show birs nuts.jpg (153.3 KB)
Sanjeev Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The next generation of fighters in the real world
> aren't gonna have pilots. Where's the fun in
> that??? :P

Don't write pilots off just yet.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

footer