Help support TMP


"Conquest Plastic Foot as Anglo-Dane Infantry?" Topic


10 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Plastic Figures Message Board

Back to the Medieval Discussion Message Board


853 hits since 6 Jan 2013
©1994-2014 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

tigrifsgt06 Jan 2013 1:21 p.m. PST

We will all be old and gray(er) by the time GB comes out with their plastic unarmored Saxons and Vikings. Could the Conquest plastic unarmored foot(60% of the box) be used as Anglo-Dane unarmored infantry? I have a lot of round shields in the parts box from WF. Also, would the WF heads look okay on the Conquest bodies, and could some of the Conquest heads also be used? Metal unarmored foot is not an option at this time.

Prince Rupert of the Rhine Supporting Member of TMP06 Jan 2013 2:41 p.m. PST

The WF heads will be pretty fiddly I think as the two companies use different ways of attaching the heads to the bodies. Conquest use shields with arms already attached as well. However they do offer quite a few round shields in the box set (not to mention that kite shields wouldn't look out of place in a late Anglo-Danish army IMO).

I think the Conquest miniatures would be ok with head swaps if there is nothing else avaliable.

fred12df06 Jan 2013 2:44 p.m. PST

I've used Conquest cavalry, with GB plastic heads (and weapons) to make some Anglo Saxon cav for Saga.

So they do fit reasonably well size wise. the GB heads are a bit bigger than the Conquest ones, but not too big to look freakish.

I have put WF heads on GB figures.

I think all 3 use slightly different styles of necks, so you may need to do some cutting and green stuffing to get things right. (IMHO the WF heads don't even fit the WF bodies without some surgery)

The metal figures that GB sell as Anglo-Dane Daneaxe troops have Norman style conical helmets with nose guards – so probably yes.

I think differences are emphasised by figure manufacturers to give the classical look for a particular faction – but in reality things would have been much more blurred.

Cyclops06 Jan 2013 3:22 p.m. PST

West Wind do separate bare heads. They're technically Arthurian but a bare head is a bare head.
link

Cerdic Supporting Member of TMP07 Jan 2013 4:18 a.m. PST

I'd use them 'as is'. The actual kit used in the Eleventh Century was probably pretty much the same for everyone.

If you're looking for differentiation then style of decoration is the way to go!

tigrifsgt07 Jan 2013 2:07 p.m. PST

Anyone tried the GB heads on the FF bodies? At this point we don't have an abbreviation for Conquest Games, so let's go with CG when referring to the Conquest Games plastics.

Personal logo Cardinal Hawkwood Supporting Member of TMP07 Jan 2013 2:28 p.m. PST

I am planning a Saxon army to match theses CG as huscarls
link

tigrifsgt07 Jan 2013 5:17 p.m. PST

It's good to see that someone else hand paints all of their shields. They would look at my Anglo-Dane army and say "What are those good looking shields doing on those God awful figures". The army stands at about 80 foot, 16 archers, and a small command group. Foot are all GB Vikings and Saxons. Archers are WF. I was thinking about adding some of the CG foot Normans to it, and also converting some FF sergeants on unbardrd horses by changing heads and shields. Period would be post Hastings and pre-crusades. TIG

Codsticker07 Jan 2013 7:44 p.m. PST

I have used WGF Saxon Fyrd heads on the Conquest bodies. Some filing is required but it is easily done and they look great. I am making Andalusians with them. The two on the left have the WGF Saxon heads the one on the right a WGF Persian head.

bluewillow07 Jan 2013 9:04 p.m. PST

nice one codsticker, a good use of the figures!

Sorry - only trusted members can post on the forums.