"Warlord P&S Epic cavalry sprue Take 2" Topic

Warlord Games got in touch with me after my review of the cavalry sprue from their forthcoming Epic Battles pike and shotte release. The sprue that I had reviewed was "a substandard casting that we should not be sending out", and they offered to send me a new sprue to review.

It arrived promptly and I have posted compare and contrast pictures of every mounted figure on the sprue with the figure from my original sprue.

Figures are pictured front and back, replacement figures marked with an orange arrow. link

Can you spot any significant difference between the two sprues?

I've scrutinised all the photos and I'll be d*mned if I can see any difference. The diminutive rider in the helmet really stands out as being under-sized in these photos.

The details on the horses are crisper but they look
more like 3d prints. Are these soft or hard plastic?
There is an early Airfix vibe there.

Well THANK YOU! I had toyed with the idea of a purchase but these samples are unacceptable. Money Saved/ H

There is some small improvement, I think. You do have to look hard though and the mould lines are still very poor.

As I said in reply to you original thread, compared to the Epic ACW and Napolionics, as they appear on the Warlord website, they don't even look like the same manufacturer!

Forgot to say I'm still hoping to get my hands on a sprue via WI tomorrow. If they don't look workable I doubt I'll be buying them.

Trouble is its hard to work out the value of them against the fact the rest of the box they come with has some utility. Its a bit of a pain just to throw the two mounted units (sorry Dragoons) keep the rest and then buy Steal Fist or Peter Pig replacements.

That said I suppose it depends on how big and army you intend to make and if you wish to buy the equivalent total content elsewhere – which I doubt you could do at the same price?

Its all just a bit annoying.

Can't see much difference. They all look pretty bad for plastic figures in 2023 TBH.

I can print crisper, cleaner more detailed 13.5mm figures on my 3d printer!

Pretty much the same, aren't they?

I would say they are the same . The front on detail is not as good due to the way they are moulded . I cant help thinking of the old flats as I am old enough to remember them .

They really look the same to me too!

They look basically the same and the camera focus is a little inconsistent.
The infantry look much cleaner than the cavalry.

They look the same, but maybe they had problems with the plastic in the early runs…?

Despite them lacking the same amount of detail as the foote sprues , I would say having just primed some Warlord Horse , that looking at them at gaming distances they would still be passable in my view .

@mysteron, I was coming back to make a similar comment. When you put them on the table, you are not going to be able to tell whether they are highly detailed or not.

Returning with my 2 cents worth of update following on from getting 'hands on' this morning. Some of which will echo above posts.

First, I would say they look better in the hand than on the screen. Digital images really are a two edged sword, it being impossible to highlight a feature in 2D without everything else in the process as well. I never look at digital photos of my own painting for that reason.

I saw my mates painted Pike on Saturday (excellent painter, many years and loads of figures under his belt)

We put them on a table at gaming height, took a step back and agreed if it were not the faint outline of the Pikes themselves, they could have been anything. Even with our glasses on we pretty much had to be at arms length to estimate Prince Rupert's Bluecoats and like I said, this guy knows a paintbrush.

This is probably Epic, as Epic.

I think I may have seen some ACW units in real life but never Napoleonic ones. Then I admit that when they first came out I was more interested in just why people were being encouraged to build Regiments with same frontages as my 28mm units, thereby missing the point, from my perspective, so I really haven't paid too much attention since.

Regarding ECW Cavalry, there's not really anyone on a horse I would tear off the sprue in a rage and stamp on, although the Dragoon in Cap comes mighty close. That said, his "spruemate" is an Officer in a distinguished pose, who is almost worth the price of the whole sprue on his own.

The worst figures are those three or four wearing 'welders aprons' caused by the position of their left arms/hands to control the horse, in relation to their pose. Like meatal figures of yore, this means solid plastic showing the reins, spoils the outline from horse's neck to riders body.

Pretty much everyone else, if subject to cleaning up flash of varying degrees, with very pointy knife, is more than redeemable and a number are, very good. To be fair, a lot of that stuff, like in between the horses neck and the reins, is pretty standard.

Even the "welders" and some others, in details, could be treated to a little Trompe l'oeil and shoved in the middle somewhere. Which raises another point. I hate units fielded in single rank, so I'm going to need more men anyway.

Warlord's Men to the Rear! Came the cry.

And yes, I know lots of the time, in lots of periods, they did use single rank. I still don't like it!

So, total rubbish? – No. Workable? – Yes

Could have been better? – Probably.

Worth buying? Not a straight forward answer. Firstly, it depends on the size of the games you are going to play.

If you want/need loads of Horse there's the Epic system problem. That until they do boxes with absolutely nothing but Horse in them, or start selling lose sprues (like in the other two periods) you are going to get lots of possible "junk". Although Dragoons, Guns and commanded muskets do have use, up to a point. The Horse to everything else ratio, box wise, could be better.

Secondly, just how much does the detail matter to you, in principal, when viewed from theoretical miles away? That's an open question, not an personal view.

Oh and finally, I still want to see unpainted ACW and Napoleonic Cavalry Sprues, when held in my hand.

Thanks Mike for staying on top of this issue. Appreciate your post and due diligence.

You are welcome Hal, there's a few things that I have asked Warlord about, they are yet to respond. The sprue illustrated in the webstore is not the sprue being distributed with WI and to reviewers. (The illustrated one is better quality, so it would be good to know if the ones being circulated are preproduction samples or the finished product.)

That's exactly why I'm going to open a box at Salute. As you can see from my post above I'm still keeping an open mind on the matter.

Free samples are one thing what money is changing hands for, something else.

I do find it amusing that I am being held up as a fierce critic of Epic P&S (judging by some of the foul mother rants my blog has received). I want it to succeed, to share my passion for the period, but also (selfishly) hoping that there might be something new for my collection. I'm not Warlord's target market – I own thousands of 15mm ECW figures.

I thought that the infantry strip was good for what it was (although I wasn't fond of the Epic styling of the close strips). I had high hopes for the cavalry sprue but was disappointed with the lack of detail (and absence of detail in many examples). My pictures on my blog caused a stir, so I put up more pictures. Warlord got in touch saying "substandard castings, we'll send you some more". Fair enough I wanted my review to be representative of the finished product. Well you can make up your own minds if the replacement sprue is better than my original. I don't think it is.

And still the hate mail comes!

Yes I've asked Warlord some questions, one of which might be more serious than how much detail is on the cavalry figures. I'll update my blog and here if/when I get a response.

I am adamant that any reviews on my blog, albeit that it will be subjective, are fair.

Not going to please all every time and everyone can see the same thing differently so……thanks for taking the time to craft a post and share your opinion with examples. I've gotten some superb figure runs from the same company that later as the molds wear down they aren't so crisp. IM sure there's an explanation for the cav spare and the observation made was fair and honest….imo😄

The sprue illustrated in the webstore is not the sprue being distributed with WI and to reviewers. (The illustrated one is better quality, so it would be good to know if the ones being circulated are preproduction samples or the finished product.

Which sprue are you referring to KYPD? I can only find completed, painted figures. Sorry if I'm being thick, finding your precise way around the webstore can be a challenge at times.

If you look at the individual boxes, the sprues are illustrated. You need to look carefully at the saker – the images in the webstore are different to the sprues being produced. Which is a bit naughty (and could, as some commentators elsewhere point out could fall foul of trading standards)

Both are on my original cavalry sprue review

As an aside I saw two more cavalry sprues today – identical to what I have had

@Keep Your Powder Dry

Dont worry about hate mail. As an Administrator and Chief Moderator of a general life forum , its just as sad part of social media with cowards ( that what they are hiding behind a screen) just like stirring and trolling .
I presume you have some sort of edit or delete button on your blog and so you can delete the offending stuff. I presume you may have also a Admin/Moderation Queue button that you can use to place all the messages initially into this area for you to accept ,edit or delete before they go into public view . if you dont use this function already ,I would recommend its use . Nothing more satisfying than saying byeeeeeeeeeeeeeee to rubbish.
Apologies to you folks as well for going off topic but I just hate it when I hear or see abusive posts

On Topic

On both sprues there is quite a bit of under cut . The best way to deal with this is to paint it grey or black depending on your chosen uniforms .For some reason it sends a message to the brain to signal its not there .It works for me on these having just painted my first infantry group. Some give and take is needed when painting these small figures
Again I am painting these to a standard that is suitable for viewing at normal gaming distances .
If its fully detailed figures that you want then Epic may not be for you .28s or larger 15s will be better but may be smaller battles should you not have the table room .

Good call on the painting Mysto. That's the sort of thing I was thinking about.

I wonder if grey would be better than black with these size figures. Noticed a lot of black on the webstore photos which didn't seem to make much of a contribution. There again a lot must depend on individual painting styles.

Might also be a reason for giving contrast paints a miss?

Close ups of smaller scale figures never seem to do any of them justice. (As an example, Van Dyck's 10mm figures – photos just do not do them justice as when seen in the flesh, they blow away the details of many 28mm figs!) Take ANY figure and blow the picture up to 5 times it's size and every blemish will show up!

I have a sample of both sprues. I was surprised at the detail on the figs. They were pretty good IMHO! A painting challenge IF you are entering them in a painting competition! For the table at an arms' length….more than respectable painting job can be had for little time.

All said, (and after seeing samples of ACW, Nap and now ECW/TYW) these are the best detailed of the lot. Remember, these are meant to be wargame figures. At an arm's length they exceed that objective.

My .02 cents worth and worth every penny you did not have to pay for! (Some tough crowd here!) 8>)

@ Trajanus

I find Contrast paints over a Zenithal priming is ideal . Zenithal priming can easily be replicated by using a grey undercoat and then a drybrush of white being applied to the model .Then I use thin coats of contrast type paints , I use paints from GW,Army painter and the new Vallejo range. The results are quite stunning on such tiny miniatures . I then use normal acrylics to paint over the under cut and highlights.
Then a final wash of equal parts strong tone , quick shade mixing medium and diluted flow enhancer adds more depth .I dont use a varnish on these plastic miniatures as it can block out detail .

i am very happy with the results

Mysteron,

I think it really does depend on what individual style each of has and of course what we are happy with. Wasn't intended to knock any particular way of painting, more a comment that if someone thinks the gains from any style are marginal, as far as they are concerned, once they are happy with what they have achieved going the extra step isn't needed.

My only personal reservation over that is, again without seeing dozens of examples from different people, is that I have seen professional painters using contrast paints on Epic. Where their use of colour to make the little guys stand out has ended up giving an appearance no one would have had prior to the invention of chemical dye.

Not the end of the world as we know it just a bit jarring and more in keeping with the use of contrast paint for Games Workshop figures.

Again, just a matter of taste/preference.

Trajanus

Of course and the 2 key elements for me is the Zenithal priming and the wash as both tone everything down . For me painting Epic in contrast paints are ideal and I have been painting 12mm for some time now You do need in my view to have them a shade lighter than you would a 28mm figure to make them be seen .

Contrast paints are also a time saver if you are careful enough and having to paint around 15 Foote Regiments is something that needs to be considered .I think its a myth when some say there isnt as much painting. Actually there is more because one needs more units to game.
My cavalry of Horse is the old style of painting meets the new . My horses are painted using the oil paint rub technique invented by the late and very much missed Peter Gilder .Horses can be painted up quickly using this technique and very realistic horses are a result. Ken the Yarkshire Gamer modified this technique by using an acrylic base colour over which the oil pints are applied ,which considerably speeds up the drying time . The troopers are painted up using Contrast paints .

To be quite honest. The image is so blurry that comparing these is almost impossible. Yes, they look mostly the same, but that can very well be image quality (focus too tight, lighting too dark on the faces).

You do need in my view to have them a shade lighter than you would a 28mm figure to make them be seen

Oh absolutely! Many years ago I was at a show where someone put on a really large 6mm Napoleonic game. The figures were fantastically well painted, not just because the level of the work achieved at that size, they would have been marvellous at 28mm too.

The thing was the guy had painted them just like small 28mm and this was back when black undercoat and leaving the finest of black outline between colours was 'the thing' so when you stood back, all the formations on the table just looked the same – black! There just wasn't enough coloured surface areas out there make the difference.

The professional painter thing I referred to is a comment on a paint being used. I have seen the same guy paint Epic ACW infantry and he has a particular contrast blue he uses for trousers. To my eye its loud, he used the same one for some of the ECW infantry too. So to me that's 200 years louder! 😀

Your eye is drawn to it. Probably just a bad choice but who am I to comment.

I guess from my own point of view I don't think I would gain that much speed, as I don't think I can be accurate enough when using contrast paints.

My aforementioned mate has done all his free Pikemen now (non contrast) and both he and I are wondering how much more effort there's going to be when it comes to the Musketeers with all their bits and pieces. He's already commented that the individual front rank of Pike were a bit of a pain compared to the rest.

I feel pretty confident regarding the mounted figures on my free sprue but the individual Dragoons on foot and the Commanded Shot are giving food for thought.

He can't remember when he last painted 10mm/15mm figures but I know the number of 28mm WW2, ACW, and Napoleonic's he owns and very few, if any, were on his bench at the same time.

We are all getting older guys!

Tajanus

You made a good point about getting older and so the eyesight isnt perhaps as good as yesteryear. I am no exception and need 1.5x magnification to post this . For painting 10-small 15mm figures I tend to use 3x magnification which gives me the views of the small details and enables me to paint them .

I have now painted a good cross section of the figures including an Infantry regiment less the pikemen at port as I have still to do these . I have also painted a falconet gun and one of the dragoons to act as an artillery guard ( to fill the base out a little).

KYPD does have a good point as I can certainly see the drop off in standard wise from some of the cavalry figures compared to the rest of the range.I still think they are passable but I do like painting but not painting bad figures. So I will also supplement some of the Warlord range with Peter Pig as the sculpting style is quite similar especially the horses .

Steel Fist is another range thats in scale. I will be usingthis range for elite cavalry and commanders . The Steel Fist horses are like thoroughbreds in comparison and will look a little odd if next to a Warlord model within the same unit .

I can certainly see the drop off in standard wise from some of the cavalry figures compared to the rest of the range.

Yes, I think that's niggle point. You need look no further than the foot figures on the very same sprue to wonder if they were made by the same manufacturer as some of the cavalry.

Really impressive detail.

I had a similar sense of disappointment when I first saw the cavalry sprue (free with Wargames Illustrated) but after looking again I'm confident I can make them work for me. Confident enough to go out and buy another issue of Wargames Illustrated.

I've painted one small unit already and they look fine alongside my Steel Fist and Peter Pig units.

As to the foot figures, I've successfully amputated them – separating them into strips of five, and rebuilding the mangled arms with Green Stuff. Now they will fit on the same size bases as the rest of my army, based for For King and Parliament.

I'm looking forward to making a foot regiment using just the separate pikemen and musketeers. I wish there was a sprue with just these.

For the avoidance of doubt, I saw the sprues delivered with my mates Pre Order big box of Epic yesterday and they are the same as the WI freebee.

As far as my eyes are concerned anyway.

The Epic version of the Pike and Shotte rule book is very nice BTW.

WARNING: This is a negative post

Okay guys . Having now started to paint a first troop of Warlord Horse ,having now completed 2 troops of Steel Fist Horse, OMG come to mind .

First of all these are from the boxed set and I can safely confirm that they are of the same standard as the free sprue cavalry . My criticism here does not refer to the artillery which are excellent or the other assorted foot troops but just the mounted horse.
Before I go onto the mounted figures, I need to mention the boxed cavalry set comes up short. You will probably find like I did that you are 3 artillery bases short despite the picture on the reverse of the box showing 6 completed cannon. For me this is no biggy as I am using MDF baes but for others I can see this being a problem and needs to be addressed by Warlord in my view.
Now for the mounted figures. In my view these come up short and you notice this more when you start painting .The detail at the front and rear of the figure is very poor .The cuirasse if they are wearing one lacks detail apart from one figure .When you start painting you fill find as I did the sash and belts start at the front of the figure and then disappears without trace on the back of the figure . This means you need to paint the detail on free hand as per the very old school figures of the 70s and 80s or get the green stuff out .I decided on mine to paint them just in buff coats and hand paint the sashes were needed .
However all is not lost as KYPD has already pointed out the Peter Pig range can fill in for the really bad figures and the sculpt style particularly for the horses is quite similar in my eyes and will blend in .

For my more hard hitting and elite cavalry I will continue using Steel Fist .

Sorry for such a negative post but I though I needed to say something . I have to say the detail of the Warlord mounted troops is very good from the side but bad when viewed from the front and the rear . I dont know if this is the same problem with the ACW and Naps Cavalry .

I dont know if this is the same problem with the ACW and Naps Cavalry

Don't know that either but I'll be trying to find out at Salute. At the moment from examination of the Website images I would still say no. The Napolionics are best and the ACW somewhere in between.

There again they Warlord wouldn't be the first manufactures in history to have some ranges better than others. Some of their earlier 28mm WW2 plastic ranges were terrible.

Though in fairness they have mostly been replaced by new figures now.

Right, back from Salute.

Managed to see both ECW and some Napolionics but no ACW.

The first of the former were units of all arms on the Warlord "In House" Painters Demo and naturally look very nice indeed. After all, if they can't show them off who can?

They had adopted the idea of painting those cavalry with the "welders aprons" as black on the "apron" edged with thin lines of brown to show the harness. This looked acceptable close up and just disappeared at arms length and beyond.

The few British and French Napoleonic cavalry that had the same issue, were dealt with in the same manner and with the same results.

I would have to say the Napolionics were marginally better figures but seeing them for real, I was struck by the fact their poses were distinctly more up right and their torso a fair bit thinner, which helped a lot by reducing the size of those "aprons" that did occur.

This seemed reasonable to me as the period uniforms were tighter fitting and contrasted with the bulk and shape of ECW troopers with Buff Coats/Frock Coats and Breast plates etc.

I did note that as per the ECW however, the Napoleonic Infantry and Guns/Gunners won the beauty contest with their Mounted counterparts.

Just my observations, so personal preference will apply.

I would add that Warlord also had a game table set up to show of the contents of their largest ECW boxed set, with buildings etc.

I have no idea who painted those but it made no difference at all. There were Regiments of Foot, Regiments of Horse and Artillery. At gaming distance, they were all representative shapes, with a bit of colour. Nothing more.

Thanks Trajanus . That was useful .

Having painted 8 Warlord Cavalry , I have to say it was an ordeal. Having painted 2 regiments of Steel Fist Horse already, the analogy I will use here is driving a red Ferrari for a month and then going back to my old red Ford Escort. The only comparison being the red colour .

Peter Pig Horse figures are fine . The only draw back for me is the limited poses.

I am seriously thinking of getting more Steel Fist horse and ordering them as I need . I usually get them within about 4 days and so never waiting long. There are many poses as well which makes painting for me more a joy to do rather than a chore.

I must stress my gripes are directed at the Warlord Cavalry only . All the other Warlord figures including the infantry are excellent and a joy to paint .
When the gun barrels are drilled out ,which is easy to do ,the artillery are truly excellent pieces .