"DAK sMG34 Teams" Topic

From AB Figures…

Man, they look a little too well rested for me. Quite possibly the boring set ever yet down by AB?

Great painting though.

Funny… I think they are one of my favourites.

War isn't an action movie and I quite like some of my men to be normal and perhaps even bored…

To each their own.

Admittedly they are not the most dynamic poses, but a tri-pod mounted MG is used in defence or for supression. This looks like the 'hun' are patiently waiting for 'Tommy' to come over the top of the jebel or out of the wadi.

Lovely painting as always Piers!

If I had one criticism it would dropping the bipod down to connect with the tripod, presumably to make it easier to cast. Bipod would normally be folded up under the barrel when on the tripod.

I like them…hurry up and wait. Considering how many figure poses are almost overly exaggerated action poses this is kind of a neat twist.

Could clip off the bipod and reposition. Great figures I'm in the midst of expanding my Africa Corps (now mostly old plastics) as the next module for Combat Command Tunis to Tobruck covering the early Med war (including Greece so I spending lots of time on the obscure Greek army).

In any case look forward to adding these figures to collection. One thing I like about AB is that they do not "overwhelm" their plastic brothers like Britannia.

Thomas J. Thomas
Fame and Glory Games

Could clip off the bipod and reposition.

You could do, but it is just a bit lazy on AB's part to cast it that way in the first place. There are other ways of getting a clean cast without using tricks like this.

A quick ‘Google' has found me eight images of tripod mounted MG34s in action with the bipod legs down. Yes it's not common, but for a bit of unit variety I quite like it.

Which is precisely why I did them that way , Mr. Cartwright.
Not Laziness.

A quick ‘Google' has found me eight images of tripod mounted MG34s in action with the bipod legs down. Yes it's not common, but for a bit of unit variety I quite like it.

Odd because the only Googled images of the SFMG34 with the bipod down I can find show the bipod legs opened out, not conveniently closed so they bridge the gap between the gun barrel and the tripod. As on this picture of the Dragon model.
link

Which is precisely why I did them that way , Mr. Cartwright.
Not Laziness.

Well if you say so! So how come the bipod legs aren't opened out then? Was that just an error? :-)

> but a tri-pod mounted MG is used in defence or for supression

If only the figures appeared to be using the guns in question. The gunner that is sitting there with his arms on his legs is not in any kind of danger. Since I doubt most gamers are gaming out the 3 years BEFORE a battle…

Well at least I know not to bother posting pics here anymore… :) The angst over a casual figure and bipods makes me fear for people's blood pressure. ;)

It may come as a surprise, but we don't all want John Woo style ridiculous models. We are allowed to have different things and different tastes. So I like my casual gunners…

Now… I'm going back to gaming the three years before the battle now. Only two years and 262 to go before I get a turn to fire.

Looks very good to me !

Well I like em .Just waiting to open fire on some unsuspecting infantry. Those will be deadly in Battlegroup.
As for the painting , I have said it before just wonderful.

C'mon, really!

You want to smack Tony around because he chose to do something different and something that may have resulted in a better casting in the process? That's like saying Piers doesn't accurately represent every nuance of weathering and fading in his painting of uniforms. Just unwarranted criticism. Don't buy the figures if you don't like them.

Stuff like this, and extreme HMGS critics pushing page-long threads bashing everything about a new convention option before they even give something a chance, is why historical gamers are the distinct minority during what is arguably the golden age of table top gaming. (I used "extreme" because I have constructively criticized them when I thought it was warranted… and BTW have also given them kudos.)

I'm all for pointing out when someone, or some entity, is doing something to promote or stifle a fair, clear and accurate picture but all this other commentary is just a pain in the (you insert your favorite term here).

This online community is really losing its mind. Excuse me if I head over to another forum where the atmosphere is generally more friendly and the narratives more helpful and pleasant.

Oh yeah, really like the new AB DAK. Thanks Tony.

wargamingusa

Man take a chill pill! All anyone has said is that the crew look a little relaxed for their taste, I think they look ok, but that is a personal opinion they are entitled to hold, and that the position of the bipod looks a bit odd and is not seen on contemporary photographs. No one has trashed the figures or said anything bad about Piers' painting. I don't see anything unwarranted about the opinions expressed here. I realise this is not the effusive praise Piers' posting of painted AB figures normally gets, but if you want endless sycophancy maybe you should look elsewhere.

Beautiful figures. Beautiful painting. Keep'em coming!
Gene

…and the old sycophancy comments come out again.

Yer… I think my jesting comment of not posting pics again might just be a sensible option.

Can't be arsed causing internet spats over little toy soldiers.

Piers:

Its just the internet – its full of opinions and is really a great market place of ideas (with a few trolls).

I like the figures will probably buy them and paint (though not up to your standards). I'm OK with casual poses (I've got some old Perry 20mm stuff of despondent late war Germans siting around exhausted. But some folks want more action oriented poses and such feedback may guide AB to offer both. Never thought about the bipods one way or the other – not a game breaker but interesting though very minute point.

Lets keep up the exchange of ideas and views (in a respectful manner). Its helped several times with some odd bit of historical info I needed for some odd Combat Command rule or army list.

And keep up the great painting – hope to grab some ABs at Historicon this year.

Thomas J. Thomas
Fame and Glory Games

…and the old sycophancy comments come out again.

As do the comments about unwarranted criticism when a couple of posts pointed out things they didn't like!

Can't be arsed causing internet spats over little toy soldiers.

Hardly a spat! But sorry for pointing out something which I thought was historically wrong.

You also posted this

You could do, but it is just a bit lazy on AB's part to cast it that way in the first place. There are other ways of getting a clean cast without using tricks like this.

accusing Tony of laziness and tricks. Totally unwarranted. More than just pointing out something you thought was historically wrong.

Good grief you make it sound like I accused him of being a paedophile or something. True I assumed that he had done it that way for ease of casting and Mr Barton has said he did not. Fair enough. But I can tell you as a fact not an assumption to cast the the bipod with the legs down and splayed out as per the pic I posted earlier would take more work to get consistent casts. The mould would need metal channels to connect the feet of the bipod to the tripod or it simply wouldn't cast. Someone has to clip off that excess metal, either the customer, which they generally don't like or the caster when the casts come out of the mould. Mr Barton obviously likes the aesthetic of the bipod down and legs together, but it remains an odd look to me, not least because the bipod would limit the traverse of the gun in that position. Hopefully all those who like it will buy loads and make Mr Barton a rich man!

Ahhhh… lets just stick to looking at toy soldiers… Fred's entitled to his opinion. Thats fair enough.

Me, I just like showing nice toys to people. Not a big gaming community in Ireland so its nice to get feedback from others.