"style of 28mm for future ancient ranges" Topic

What type or style of 28mm figures do people want for the future? Either:

chunkier 28mm style of the likes of copplestone, crusader, BTD, wargames factory etc.

or

slender proportioned figures such as Perry, ebob, games workshop (lord of the rings) style

is that heroic or true scale…properly proportioned or cartoonish wargaming standard(big head and hands)
what about flats?

ok, heroic scale or true scale? What is favoured, in a sort of poll?

Chunky like Crusader/Artizan/Wargames Factory/etc. is my preference because that would match my colleciton the best.

More stuff designed by Steve Saleh, love his work and I always buy his stuff!

Slim-ish as most ancient soldier/warriors were not all that bulky, I would think. Also, such a style would fit in with the 1000's of Ral Partha, MinFig, Frontier, and other older ancients I have.

I predict the answers being split 50/50, so with that in mind maybe the top half heroic and the bottom half slim? Then again you might find having a slim top half and bulky legs might sell better. My own range featuring a bulky left leg and bulky right arm on an otherwise slim body sadly foundered.

i'm doing successors now with a mix of crusader and gripping beast. they work really well together. anything to add to that or fight against that i would want similarly styled figures

I want you to make them fat because thats what I already have, however I also want you to make them thin as that is what I am planning to have in the future. Now, if you was to make them in between I would think about it but they would have to be exactly in between with no noticable difference between the fat and thin sculpts. I want the shields cast on the heavey infantry types,with seperate shields for the light infantry types,that go's for the heads also. They should be slightly taller then 28mm ,but not near 29mm. The poses should not be very active,but still have some movement in them such as running,etc. They must be sculpted by one of the three designers I like and priced under one doller. You must also make and release something from a period that I personally want and that has not been done multiple times by other manufacture's. I will also buy them only in single figures and I will need you to send me 20 -30 free samples. I will not pay shipping,vat,state sales tax,etc ,and I expext you to lie to help me to avoid those costs. Then I may buy some --- but probably not. ---OH !! Also --you cannot be more then a half hour drive from my house, hotel rooms less then $80.00 USD a night,with no crime around your location. Good luck in your venture, Russ Dunaway

"I want you to make them fat because thats what I already have, however I also want you to make them thin as that is what I am planning to have in the future. Now, if you was to make them in between I would think about it but they would have to be exactly in between with no noticable difference between the fat and thin sculpts. I want the shields cast on the heavey infantry types,with seperate shields for the light infantry types,that go's for the heads also. They should be slightly taller then 28mm ,but not near 29mm. The poses should not be very active,but still have some movement in them such as running,etc. They must be sculpted by one of the three designers I like and priced under one doller. You must also make and release something from a period that I personally want and that has not been done multiple times by other manufacture's. I will also buy them only in single figures and I will need you to send me 20 -30 free samples. I will not pay shipping,vat,state sales tax,etc ,and I expext you to lie to help me to avoid those costs. Then I may buy some --- but probably not. ---OH !! Also --you cannot be more then a half hour drive from my house, hotel rooms less then $80.00 USD USD a night,with no crime around your location. Good luck in your venture, Russ Dunaway"

This should be posted as a banner for all the message boards. It does seem to capture the discussions that go on here quite well.

I actually left off quite a few other requirements ,my pointy typing finger was beginning to cramp. I am a highly trained expert on these topics.
Cheers and a smile, Russ Dunaway

I think that the market has already decided. The style will be more anatomic (i.e Perry style). Foundry style with large heads is out of fashion.

Perry were the first with anatomic metals and then their plastics followed suit. Artizan's newer metallics go in this direction. Both Warlord (Celts, ECW) and Wargames Factory (Germans, Vikings) are tending to more anatomic sculpts with their newest releases. Immortal Greeks also look like they will be similar. Victrix Napoleonics are also in this direction.

Look at this comparison.
Foundry Viking, Crusader Viking, Wargames Factory German, Wargames Factory Celt, Warlord Celt, Gorgon Druid
link
or here
link
Notice how the Foundry figure looks wrong and old fashioned.

More pictures here
link
Regards
Mick

Hi Mick,

Although from an older range and not the most practical of poses, I'd still, without hesitation, pick the Foundry figure over any of the other pics in the first comparison shot (except possibly the Crusader one). Beauty is very much in the eye of the beholder…

Simon

My God ole boy , your right !!! The Foundry "looks wrong" !! just Wrong !!!! Its just wrong !!!!
Russ

LOL!!!

In many ways the industry is making its own mind up – I am relieved to see quality figures like those from Gorgon and Aventine appearing. They look like humans and not caricatures.

Mix of standing and dynamic poses would be nice but we need to be practical about fitting them on the bases we use.

I would be happy to see consistency within each range and/or manufacturer.

"Perry were the first with anatomic metals…"

WHAT?!?!?! Somebody's going to need to explain to me, then, how all these more-correctly-anatomically-proportioned figures I have got sculpted before either of the twins ever picked up a Wax 5 or a bit of putty.

I ain't even goin' near the irony of picking on a figure… well, y'all just go look for yerselves. He's "AXE 21" here, and right below him, you'll see who sculpted him:

link

There's a whole bunch of Seriously Not Making Sense going on here, and so I'm just going to switch over to tequila until I can read it and it's comprehensible.

And oh, by the way, you want *me* to buy your figures? Then they'd better not look stupidly large next to a standard that's roughly on the axis: Perry Foundry EIR to Gripping Beast's classical ranges--with no greater divergence than Crusader or Polemarch (by two sculptors who have also done bulkier ancients afore). I'm getting real tired of the bloated giants.

Allen

Dear Allen,

Thank-you for your superior knowledge of miniatures history. I had no idea that the Foundry figure was sculpted by the Perries for Citadel in 1991.

I was into wargaming in the mid 1970s up to about 1982. Then I had a 20 year pause and started again as my kids got old enough to show some interest.

However, it does show my point.
In the 60s and 70s most figures were anatomic within the range of the sculptors ability. Big head style (i.e. Foundry style) was the new direction in the late 1980s. In the past few years things are going back to a more anatomical look (i.e. Perry own range and GW LOTR).

However, none of them are truly anatomical like the Airfix and Tamiya figures. In 28mm only Hat follows this style and they look thin next to the (current) Perry anatomic sculpts.

Regards
Mick

Without any doubt I would choose for more anatomically correct figures. Look for a moment at Immortal Miniatures, they are fantastic!! Anatomically correct and very dynamic.
This would be the trend for the future.

Philipus

Sure. Tutus are good.

I have to say: I am not a great fan of overly-dynamic posing. What looks heroic on an amphora does not necessarily translate well to fitting well on a wargame base or stand.

As I think back over the years and consider those ranges that seemed to be on the "cutting edge" in dynamic posing or especially flamboyant sculpting--in historical ranges (fantasy is quite different!)--most simply aren't around any more, or putter along with few apparent sales. No names: if you've been around, you know who they are, both in 15mm and 25-28mm.

Allen

Allen,
I am interested in your opinion on the original question.
Do you prefer chunier figures or slender proportioned figures?
What do you think the trend is?

Regards
mick

Allen says "I am not a great fan of overly-dynamic posing"; me too, in general.

I strongly prefer rather static figures for close order infantry, with upright spears, and ideally shields to front; otherwise I can't fit them on the bases with the right density. They stick out front and back, or hang over the edges, and are hard to rank up and store.

However I do rather like dynamic posing for light troops. There is more room on the bases for them and I let myself go…

With very dynamic I didn't mean over-dynamic! Such figures don't come in my collection.
F.e. I don't like Celtic chariots with figures thumbling down the chariot pole. We have to stay realistic and keep in mind this is vertially impossible. What is written by the Romans was not always correct and surely propaganda by the Generals to finance their wars!!
It was a long search for me to find (payable) figures with good anatomy and the correct amount of dynamism. Immortal Miniatures have both!!
Philipus