A CONSUMER REVIEW - Bretonnian Knights of the Realm on Foot

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 มิ.ย. 2024
  • Warhammer The Old Worlds Kingdom of Bretonnia Knights of the Realm on Foot consumer REVIEW - are the new Warhammer miniatures any good?
    I bought, assembled, reviewed and compared a set of Bretonnian Knights on Foot and some of the other knights on foot:
    - "Frostgrave Knights" by North Star Military Figures,
    - “Foot knights 1450-1500” by Perry Miniatures,
    - “Foot Knights XI-XIII century” by Fireforge Games.
    I also compared the scale of these miniatures to Bretonnian Men-at-arms, Bowmen, classic Skaven clanrat, Orc Boy and some other clasic miniatures.
    00:00 Intro
    02:10 Review of the Bretonnian Knights on Foot
    11:30 Comparison to Frostgrave Knights by Northstar Military Figures
    15:04 Comparison to Foot knights 1450-1500 by Perry Miniatures
    17:03 Comparison to Foot Knights XI-XIII century by Fireforge Games
    18:57 Scale comparison of the knights
    20:33 Scale comparison of the knights and other miniatures
    23:16 Transfers rant
    23:48 Summary
    A bit deeper analysis of design, complexity, instructions clarity, transfers and sprues. If You like what You see - subscribe, like, share and comment! :)
  • บันเทิง

ความคิดเห็น • 88

  • @MatthewKruse-ri8ep
    @MatthewKruse-ri8ep หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Great review! Thanks for showing all the different ranges and their comparison of sizes - that was FANTASTIC!

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thank You, I am very happy You liked it :)

  • @dd11111
    @dd11111 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    While I don't think that there are really that many peices per model, I HATE GW's new style of splitting models down the center or splitting arms in two. It makes kitbashing so much more dificult. I understand that the trade off can be more detailed minis, but thats not always a good thing.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Exactly! I forgot to mention it, but this is part of the problem for me. I guess it's not even the number of parts, it's how they are split - so You are right!

    • @krinkrin5982
      @krinkrin5982 28 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      I don't think the reason is wanting to have mode detailed minis. You can put a lot of detail in an arm without splitting it in two. I think the main reason is that GW is creating monopose models using 3D modeling software now, and so the cuts are made in a way to allow the parts to be molded because the modelers are no longer taking into account all the intricacies of the actual production process during their design. This also incidentally makes kitbashing much more difficult, and so forces you to buy GW stuff.

  • @oldorcsneverdie4854
    @oldorcsneverdie4854 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Thank you for the review. I'm tempted to get some Frost Grave Knights and try placing my old left over Knights of the Realms heads on them.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      I was actually thinking the same thing :) And thank You for Your kind words :)

  • @NoiselessShadow
    @NoiselessShadow หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    The earliest Citadel miniatures were 25mm (foot to eye). They look diminutive next the later 28mm models which would be standard for many years. GW switched to 32mm a few years ago, perhaps on the theory that bigger toys seller better and plastic is very cheap as a production material the cost is not a concern. Though of slender proportion, the Perry miniatures are 30mm; this might have been a good choice as the jump to 32mm is quite noticeable.

    • @necaacen
      @necaacen หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      theyre easier to paint, can hold more detail and hence look better, thats why theyve done it.

    • @NoiselessShadow
      @NoiselessShadow หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@necaacen Larger models have more "impact". Massive center-piece models sell very well and the plastic medium puts no constraint on their size (either for cost or the effects of gravity).
      Recently, I was looking at the AoS models on display at my FLGS and, quite honestly, they looked overblown, doll-like even.
      I prefer more modest proportions. Check out Tom Meirer's Ral Partha elves from the early 1980s. They are a dainty 25mm and have exquisite detail.

    • @krinkrin5982
      @krinkrin5982 28 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      If I remember correctly, this switch happened around the time GW lost in court against a 3rd party parts manufacturer, so their switch to a larger scale was probably first and foremost motivated by wanting to cut their competition off, as their parts would be no longer compatible.

    • @NoiselessShadow
      @NoiselessShadow 28 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@krinkrin5982 The Chapter House case. It turns out you CAN'T copyright arrows and crosses. It certainly was a factor when it came to breaking the lore and bringing in the plus-sized Primaris Marines and the Age of Sigmar.
      However, there is nothing inherently protected about a scale of miniatures. Third-party companies will quickly bring out 32 mm bits and knock-offs to match this new scale or whatever larger size GW move to keep ahead of the competitors, so that can't be the main reason for making larger miniatures.

  • @JP-dv7rf
    @JP-dv7rf หลายเดือนก่อน

    Very helpful video, thank you for all of the information provided here.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thank You, I am happy that it was of any use for You :)

  • @LaMOi1
    @LaMOi1 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I’ve yet to try Perry…. I’m very interested!! They look good. But still don’t scale well with GW??

  • @andrewwilson4975
    @andrewwilson4975 9 วันที่ผ่านมา

    This is precisely why I prefer metal minis for the most part.

  • @SiliconSicilian
    @SiliconSicilian หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Good video displaying the scale differences between alternative miniatures. While I don't agree with your assessment of the GW miniatures, it can be useful to those looking to save some cash on minis. I do agree with your assessment of the transfers, however. To me, I don't think they hold any value but if they are going to be there, the sheet should have a strong variety available.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thank You for watching :) I think that with the quality GW is doing, it just could have been so much better. They are not bad though, just annoying to assemble.

  • @TheSupporter76
    @TheSupporter76 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Thanks for the I'm depth comparison, as nice as they are, I think I'm might be looking at using other foot knights, maybe wargames atlantic ones since they're releasing their own.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Thank You for watching, please keep coming back for more content :) I can't wait for Wargames Atlantic ones, I love their miniatures.

  • @bennconner1195
    @bennconner1195 11 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

    I actually like the older kits more. I think GW where at there best around 7th and 8th addition warhammer fantasy. The models had good details, lots of custom options, easy to put together and not over designed. A few good examples would be the orc boar boyz and black orcs. I have always been an orcs & goblins faction loyalist so I don’t have much experience with other factions but my brother played high elves and most of their 7th to 8th edition stuff was really good as well.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  9 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา

      I totally agree, that's a very good point.

  • @HO-bndk
    @HO-bndk หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    It's laughable that the GW knights are wearing ridiculous looking jousting helms and many of them hold their swords in ways that the medieval fight books expressly tell you not to. 😂

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      That's a good point, I actually missed that :)

    • @grisch4329
      @grisch4329 16 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

      What?! Are you telling me that there are things in Warhammer that aren’t realistic?! My mind is utterly blown. Next you’ll tell me something like the Leman Russ battletank isn’t actually a viable main battle tank design! My reality is now shattered. Shattered I tell you.

  • @sam74mumm
    @sam74mumm หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks for the helpful review. The frostgrave knights seem to offer the best cost-performance ratio(for my army Perry miniatures are a bit too skinny and non-bretonian in contrast to my highland and older GW ones).
    Hope you´ll upload a 9th age battle with these miniatures one day.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thank You for watching, yes indeed, Frostgrave miniatures are really cool for their cost-performance ratio :)

  • @LaMOi1
    @LaMOi1 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Really appreciate the size comparison and kit bashing options…..

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  29 วันที่ผ่านมา

      I am glad You liked it :)

  • @tankbwoy
    @tankbwoy หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    best way to do rank and file modles (imo) is torso with or without seperate legs, arms with weapon options, head. All interchangeable and posable of course.
    GWs way is nice for display painters i think, but then again, why would you want 20 of em.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Good point, I agree completely :)

  • @Mittens_Gaming
    @Mittens_Gaming 7 วันที่ผ่านมา

    They look good, as far as models go, but they do not really rank up well on the base sizes suggested. They look more like skirmish game figures than rank and flank figures, in terms of poses and hose they fit. They look like warriors involved individually in a fight, very nice looking warriors, but not ones ranked up for a fight.
    It reminds me of a kit made for age of Sigmar, you don't get "Great weapons", you get "Two Handed Axes", you get figures that look better as skirmish models than as ranked troops.
    In a box, I think the 100 years war figures from Perry Mini's would work great for bretonians, though of course they would look tiny compared to other modern GW figures.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  6 วันที่ผ่านมา

      You have to bear in mind that I put them on 20x20 bases. I think they would fit 25x25 (as they are designed to) really well, considering that even on these smaller bases it's doable.

  • @nealbarton7434
    @nealbarton7434 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Good review - GW are a miniatures company and this shows.
    For gaming figures, your alternatives are great example. I’d also add in Mantic Games though they make limited human figures to compare too

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes, modern Mantic minis are great quality, I just didn't have any suitable Mantic knights.

  • @pacofores
    @pacofores หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    I don't like the new scale for GW miniatures, sorry. I prefer 28mm, even "heroic", but not this 32mm or even larger :(

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Yes, they are a bit larger than classic GW miniatures. I don't understand where the size creep comes from but it seems a consistent trend. Thanks for watching!

  • @scatterthewinds3126
    @scatterthewinds3126 13 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    As a bretonnia collector I skipped this kit. I think to make a better foot knight I'm better off converting one way or another.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  13 วันที่ผ่านมา

      It's still a pity they kinda wasted such an opportunity. Your voice is the best proof of this.

  • @krinkrin5982
    @krinkrin5982 28 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I think part of the difference is that Games Workshop set is scaled to 32mm, while the others are in the older 28mm scale. They should work better with the 5th and 6th edition models.
    The amount of detail on the GW models is both a blessing and a curse. It makes them much better looking when painted, especially if you're not good with freehanding insignia, but also makes the painting process much more time-consuming, and any missed details will annoy you.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      I don't think it's about the amount of detail. I have assembled multiple Underworlds and WarCry sets, they have STUNNING models, very detailed, at least level of KotR on foot - and they are much better to assemble.

  • @GloriousGrunt
    @GloriousGrunt หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    The axes look ridiculously large 😆

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes, they do :) Such an axe would weight 15kg. They are not ogres for heavens sake! ;)

  • @grahamroden8897
    @grahamroden8897 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    GW doesn’t think of casual gamers

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      That's one of my points. I can do this no problem, I will just be a bit more annoyed than usual :) But if they want to sell these to people who just begin their hobby journey - that's not a great idea.

  • @balkenkreuz2063
    @balkenkreuz2063 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Those new knights on foot miniatures look more akin to Reiksgard than anything Bretonnia has in their roster. IMHO, Perry Miniatures and Wargames Atlantic make knights on foot that fit better the Brets aesthetic (not to mention more affordable kits as well).

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      I personally think the aesthetics are fine, I would like more variety and easier build though 🙂

  • @Griffonbait
    @Griffonbait หลายเดือนก่อน

    You seen primarily concerned with height. Remember that, in reality, not everyone was/is the same height. A +/-1-3 mm difference in height @28 mm scale, i.e. 1:56 scale, for example, would mean a real-world difference of +/- 56 mm to 168 mm (i.e. roughly 2-6 inches). That is hardly anything to be concerned about given the nature of human height. It would be good to see knightly units with men of varying height.
    The real concern is the height to thickness ratio of the minis - this determines the squatness of the figures (short & fat vs. tall & lanky). I am tall and fat, so personally I would look out of place on your gaming board, and in flesh-overflowing armour. I must qualify that statement by saying that I am referring to a plastic miniature version of myself.😁
    Great video - the first I have seen of yours. I suggest using a simple scale measuring device on a table/wall with the minis in front of it, taking the video directly above/facing said table/wall. I can see you struggling to align the minis in the take. It doesn't mean I do not like your video, just some advice on sprucing up your production. Plan what you are going to do and ask yourself if there will be any issues when presented in your planned method.
    +1 Subscribers
    In the long term for this channel, please be careful and not fall into the trap of bashing (hating on) companies for their choices, you will inevitably alienate some viewers, as can already be seen in the comments section (yeah, I am a comment reader). For example, if you generally only bash GW for their products and mostly praise other companies, you are going to cut _a_ _lot_ of viewers from subscribing in the future. But hey, you do you. I am personally an eclectic viewer, taking both the good and the bad in its various forms, taking in the relevant information and ignoring the clearly biased views. Not that I am saying I am seeing that in your presentation right now, it takes time for presenters to reveal themselves fully.
    Good luck with the channel. I look forward to seeing more from you.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thank You very much for thorough response :) I agree on the height/squatness issue. I mentioned in the video that I am generally a fan of GW - for years. I just personally think this set could have been much better :)

  • @LaMOi1
    @LaMOi1 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This was exactly the way I felt with Stormcast Vigilors… it just seems over complicated to put the model together… 10 pieces!! For one mini!
    And no freedom to put the mini in the pose of your own….
    Whereas Frostgrave, Oathmark, Fireforge are for sure no way on the level of detail and quality…. But are far easier and more fun to make due to allowing the person freedom to input their own creativity.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  29 วันที่ผ่านมา

      That's a very good point, I agree! :)

  • @Tulkash01
    @Tulkash01 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    7 pieces is not particularly complex in my opinion. Hammerers, which are pretty easy to assemble is 8 pieces each.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      That's an interesting point. Maybe it depends on the parts involved - in case of KotR these parts are just tiny. I don't own a Hammerer set so it's hard for me to compare. Still, I am not a huge fan of this trend and I don't understand it. GW makes STUNNING minis in push-fit line (Underworlds miniatures are AMAZING), so why not use this for more sets? I understand bigger models but playing scale modelling with pieces as big as half of my pinky nail? That's a bit annoying :)

    • @GloriousGrunt
      @GloriousGrunt หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      I still think its excessive when compared to older kits or kits from other companies, you can make great quality minis without wasting 10x of your customers time in assembly, maybe they want the extra super glue sales 😆

    • @goldcase9071
      @goldcase9071 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      This is true but with hammerers putting the pieces together was easy same with ironbreakers. The issue comes when have to combine tons of tiny pieces.

  • @UltraRealTrueJesus
    @UltraRealTrueJesus หลายเดือนก่อน

    I want to buy into TOW. but I also do not want to buy into TOW. And from a GW hobby, these knights are absolute win for me. but? seems too High Def to really be game pieces. as a display the immerision breaks. so it's a good looking set I want to do a army of Imperial/Inquisitorial guard, but at the same time... too much work.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      I always encourage returning to hobby :)

  • @paulgibbons2320
    @paulgibbons2320 20 วันที่ผ่านมา

    They need to make their models different from others on the market to justify their markup. Hence, the complexity.
    They have a love-hate relationship with Bretonians and get annoyed that other people sub in other models from other company's.
    If you want to go to official contests, you need the real McCoy's. Otherwise, you do what you want.
    I think the reason behind the end of times was people just buying off ebay or subing in models from other companies.
    They had to find an answer to that. So now they are bigger and more complex.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  20 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      I personally think the reason for the end of old Warhammer was incredibly hard entry - You needed A LOT of minis. I think now it's gonna only be harder for GW.

    • @paulgibbons2320
      @paulgibbons2320 20 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @PAWNSANDSWORDS There is a lot of competition now making very good models. I personally had two warhammer armies. Went under the bed when they ended it.

  • @martinjrgensen8234
    @martinjrgensen8234 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Too many pieces? Eh

  • @youtubevanced4900
    @youtubevanced4900 23 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Highland miniatures.
    Their models are much better.
    I just painted a mounted knight.
    It printed in 3 pieces. Horse, knight, and shield.
    That’s it.
    No mould lines, no clean up, no assembly. Print and paint. It’s so easy.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  23 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Yes, that's true, however I am not that fond of resin, it's very brittle.

    • @youtubevanced4900
      @youtubevanced4900 23 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@PAWNSANDSWORDS not true. The new resins out are very similar to injection moulded plastic. 5 years ago when I started printing, yes, I would agree with you.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  23 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@youtubevanced4900 Oh, that's interesting! How do I recognise more resilient resin? I buy resin minis from time to time and they keep being fragile :(

    • @youtubevanced4900
      @youtubevanced4900 22 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@PAWNSANDSWORDS I’m currently printing with Anycubic ABS like V2. It remains quite flexible. I’ve dropped a couple things from a sitting position and nothing has broken with this resin yet.
      Each of the major brands I believe have a similar product available.

  • @bryanvestal3923
    @bryanvestal3923 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Glad I didn't pick these up now. 80 bucks is to much to pay to be frustrated.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Don't get me wrong, miniatures are good quality. However, putting them together is really a bit disheartening. At least it was for me.

    • @tamethisbeast
      @tamethisbeast หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      One major issue with how they stack up on the bases is that you put them on 20 mm by 20 mm bases where games workshop has moved towards a 25x25 mm base standard for all foot infantry that are non-monsterous

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@tamethisbeast Please note that I haven't complained about how they stack up on the bases - and this is exactly the reason. I am pretty sure they stack up on 25x25 very well. Even on 20x20 it's doable. So this is not a concern. They are just very annoying to assemble.

    • @justinbarnes8834
      @justinbarnes8834 หลายเดือนก่อน

      This all depends on if you want to enter an 'official' GW tourney as you will need all your mini's to be GW sourced, Note you can substitute in AOS and LOTR mini's although LOTR is smaller 28mm true scale and might look a bit small next to the 32mm scale WHTOW are made in. However if you're not worried about having a full GW army then some of the 3d printed models by Highland miniatures can be an excellent fit. Just make sure you order 32mm size as the 28mm scale will look a bit small.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@justinbarnes8834 That's an excellent point. Some 3d printed minis are amazing. I am just not a huge fan of resin, because it's very brittle, so spears, lances and swords will get broken a lot.

  • @MaTTabletop
    @MaTTabletop หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    09:52 - I think the bitter truth is that the hole TOW project is not meant to bring new people into the hobby in any way. its a limited offer to veterans of WHFB, who are a small group with great purchasing power. anyway, nice review!

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thank You! I am super happy that I can share my love for the hobby! :) I really wish GW treated The Old World seriously, it has SO MUCH POTENTIAL!

  • @princeofcupspoc9073
    @princeofcupspoc9073 หลายเดือนก่อน

    So GW have given up on selling anything useful for miniatures battles, and just wants to be Hasbro selling toys to kids for Christmas? That's what I get from this.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน

      I actually like Hasbro, they do a lot of useful tabletop gaming stuff :) These models are nothing like Hasbro, they are really advanced models in kinda scale modelling vein.

  • @turulero
    @turulero หลายเดือนก่อน

    The sculpting is clean and elegant as always, but the size of those models and their aesthetics seem horrible to me... Especially their aesthetics... There are helmets that look like toys and the choice of designed parts seems very poor to me. They only impose those who like very big things and that's it, but for me they are the worst Bretonnians I have ever seen.

  • @danielbrisch5029
    @danielbrisch5029 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The size of the Knights is horrible. Don´t get why these were not sized down for the Old World to fit the older plastics.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      My guess is they got used to do everything in larger scale.

  • @PaulJohn01
    @PaulJohn01 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I play a lot of Warhammer on PC but i would never support GW directly by buying their figures. If i ever get back into tabletop wargaming i'll buy used or from other manufacturers of minis.

  • @hughmyers8583
    @hughmyers8583 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Dude those are incredibly easy to build. I could have built that whole box in the runtime of this video. These are beginner level models and if you can't deal with these then this hobby is not for you.

    • @PAWNSANDSWORDS
      @PAWNSANDSWORDS  หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      I respectfully disagree ;) It's not even about how hard it is to build them (yes, they are not very hard to assemble), it's about how time consuming it is. I've been doing this for a long time and I simply don't like this level of complexity for such basic models (infantry unit). Come on, 3 part head for a 28mm infantry model?

    • @GloriousGrunt
      @GloriousGrunt หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      GW sell "Easy Build" models that are the beginner level models, some don't even require glue and their older kits like tactical marines are way fewer pieces and quicker to build. This is a much more complex kit with many more pieces per model (unnecessarily so).

    • @mattaffenit9898
      @mattaffenit9898 8 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      Not hard doesn't mean not annoying.
      It's the exact reason I haven't touched Old World minis despite adoring Warhammer Fantasy, especially if I'm making whole armies.
      Plus they can't be used as easily for as many games, and if you prefer more grounded, low fantasy models than the exaggerated weaponry and height. Personally I prefer to be able to use my minis for as many different games as possible, so that can legit be a dealbreaker for me.

  • @Liopot68
    @Liopot68 19 วันที่ผ่านมา

    is it your first day assembling GW models? get over it

  • @idiotproofdalek
    @idiotproofdalek หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Wow, as a hobbyist of 30 years, this video comes across as entitled whining.