"HaT 28mm plastic French Light Infantry Masters" Topic

I can't imagine who would buy WF if there was an equivalent figure from HaT, Victrix, Perry or Warlord

Both WF and Warlord Games produce a box of Celts. From what I have seen in pictures, the two kits seem roughly equal in quality (though I haven't been able to examine them from close by in real world). They also contain roughly similar amount of figures (32 for WF, 30 for WG). WF figures seem to be a bit cheaper too (on my FLGS, the price per Celt figure for WF is 75% of equivalent WG price). Furthermore, the WF Celts seem to come with plastic slings and actually enough shields to equip all the Celts (unlike WG set, which only contains shields for half of the Celts in it).

So in this where there are actually similar plastic kits from two manufacturers, I would probably consider the WF version if I ever decided to start a Celt force (not very likely). Though most probably I would buy a mixture of both of the kits, just to provide more variety.

Griefbringer

@JohnnyBGoode
If you think painting minis is the equivalent of brain surgery, and only brain surgeons are allowed to comment, you seriously shouldn't have stopped taking the meds.

If you think painting minis is the equivalent of brain surgery, and only brain surgeons are allowed to comment, you seriously shouldn't have stopped taking the meds.

Have you ever done any brain surgery? I have and from a hand/eye coordination point of view painting minis is probably more challenging. Now eye surgery is a different matter – that does need a delicate touch. :-)

I couldn't disagree with BravoX more, and I am in complete agreement with Griefbringer and Doug Zapaedo.

Bravo, I was just pointing out
a) 3 cases where you have to be an expert to know what you're doing
b) just because you say so doesn't mean it's true and
c) anyone elses' opinion is just as valid as your own.

Tony often posts here and he'll be glad to see that he has supporters as well as those who blindly condemn his products.

@johnnyBGoode,
You have tried the Victrix French figures?They are so easy to glue together.
As for "caricature looking"
picture
picture
picture
They are a little less "clone like" compared to others.
Regards,

Fine so your view is that you have to be a top expert 'brain surgeon' painter before you are allowed to comment on any paint job of any level and apparently Fred agrees with….

Still think you both need to keep taking the meds if that is really your view.

Oh boy…
ETS is not about showing the maximum possible at painting miniatures, its a place for HäT fans to ahow their stuff, and that means all styles available. The 1/72 scale and toy soldiers often has people painting figures in plain colours, without shading, similar to flats. Not because these people are imbecile, but because its their style, so whats wrong with that? Also, it would be plain stupid to spend days on painting wargaming figures to a "pro" level, because you would never be able to finish an army in time.
Like it is, HäT's page is displaying lots of very different styles and works, and there is not a single "bad" contribution there, no matter how arrogant or stupid some people here bash upon them.

Lonkka: as you seem to be so keen upon bashing and insulting other peoples works, I really expected something from your page. What I saw there were pretty sloppy, unmotivated figures, some with bare metal showing through, some with plain bases. And you dare criticize *anyone*? Ridiculous… Especially if the aim of your arrogant rant is far superiour to you.

BravoX: you obviously don't need to be a master to comment on something. But you MUST know what you are talking about. The opinions of people who only want to comment, bash, or laugh at something they don't know **** about is just worthless. – That is not directed at you!

Bx

Just a quickie – HaT have recently pointed out that the first test shots (that are currently being painted) are v.1 of the mould, and they are currently up to v.4, improving the depth of detail etc each time. Now obviously talk is cheap (it must be if this site is anything to go by) but I am encouraged by this. The v.1 set i have on teh painting table are really very nice, and so I am now eagerly waiting to see the final production version.

IMO, they are the equal to Perry and Victrix, but I appreciate that this is only my opinion. I will use them all on the same table.

Anyway, enough of this, back to the brain surgery……

Garfield,
naturally I "dare" to give comments or "criticize" whomever I want to, whenever I want to. I do not need your or anybody else's permission for that.

I most certainly haven't ranted or bashed anyone. Just made some general comments. If you have problems with someone not looking through rosy red glasses and speaking their mind, then that's just too bad. And singing high praise about bronze won't make it gold no matter how hard you try.

Too bad you hated our site and the figures there -no skin off my back. You most certainly are entitled to your opinion and I'm among first to defend that right.

I don't think that many of our site's Finns would show bare metal (although wear and tear is always possible). Russians might be a different matter as the guys who deas them paints really really FAST, like 54 figures a day, and he uses just the basic flock in the bases.

Great to see that this thread promted you to sign up and speak your mind -welcome aboard!

In fact, I liked your site and think you deserve praise for bringing an interresting and underrepresented topic to the public. I just felt that you somehow delight in bashing upon people who have done you absolutely no harm. Especially because you call other people sloppy and bad painters while you do no better!
HäTs ETS is neither an official catalogue nor is it CMoN, its just a place for fans to show their painted HäT minis. And I believe it represents quite well the whole spectrum of painted miniatures, from simple to great.
I think it would be best if you get yourself some HäT figures, paint them to a level you deem acceptable and send them in to raise the level that you seem to think of as too low.
I do apologize for being so harsh in my first post, but I'm still unsure if some people here criticize stuff because its necessary and they want it to improve, or just for the sake of it.

Fine so your view is that you have to be a top expert 'brain surgeon' painter before you are allowed to comment on any paint job of any level and apparently Fred agrees with….

Well now I didn't actually say that. Just disabusing you of the notion that brain surgery is technically difficult. Of course there is a lot more to the job than just the surgery. The thing about brain surgery is that if you do screw it up your "customer" is not in a fit state to comment, although others may do – such as the courts. Also I never put my handiwork on the web for general comment! The brain surgery that is – some of my painting is on the web! :-)

For the one last time (meaning my last post on the subject without any negative subtexts in the sentence, just kinda tired of repeating myself over and over again. OK?):

Certainly not criticizing for the heck of it, just tried to bring up a quality thing that has puzzled me for quite a some time now.

Also certainly not bashing anyone.
And how does getting hurt or not justify criticism?

It seems that so many people are extremely touchy with non-positive comments. Hardly surprising really, which is the reason I tend to keep my trap shut when I don't have anything positive to say.

This time I made a general comment about a website's certain segment's general paintjob quality without singling anyone and not going overboard with the comments. This resulted getting labelled as a twisted evil mastermind who cruelly delights in ridiculing and tormenting people. And can't even do better himself (beauty is indeed in the eyes of the viewer).

MWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!
Sorry, couldn't resist… ;P

@Marc.
Good to hear that, I will pick up a box when I see them to check out in the flesh so to speak. If they can match Perry then they are interesting for sure, but the jury is still out .

I did notice that in the 1:72 section the French 1805 artillery masters were a big improvement over the old gribeauval artillery piece they had which was almost completely devoid of detail, so maybe Zvezda is nudgeing them in the right direction after all.

At last, my evil plan is working – MWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

Chatting to HaT is a fantastically rewarding experience, and one thing they have often said is how they admire the quality of Zvezda. I really appreciate the fact that they have constantly moved forward in terms of quality, from the actual figures through to the production process. Plastic moulding does seem to be a black art, unlike the flexible moulds for metal minis which seem to work well in picking up all detail with ease.

Up to now I have replaced the HaT guns with Italeri or Zvezda (strange, but it is cheaper to buy a box of plastic artillery and throw away the crew than it is to buy metal cannons), but I have high hopes for new HaT guns.

I can see Lonkka1Actual's point about the painting. I don't think he or anyone is really knocking the Hat forum but (oh there had to be a but didn't there…) it's difficult to judge the Hat figures based on the basic paint jobs on the forum compared to the exceptional paint jobs we see for the Victrix/Perry figures. But (damn it… there's another but!) thanks to macpheesminiaturemen we have a good comparison of figures with the same excellent paint job (great site too Scott, always one of my favourite sites to visit to see how it should be done).

The Hat move to 28mm is excellent news. By bringing out european armies it'll balance out the Waterloo bias and even better with the French in pre 1812 uniform and Bavarians in the pipeline we could see more stuff for the 1809 campaign (Austrians in helmet please).

I'm assuming this range is aimed heavily at wargamers due to the scale and the fact they are hard plastic so hopefully the poses will be a bit more wargamer friendly than the 1/72nd figures. Hat are pretty prolific so it could be a good year.