Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Men: Armor that covers full body, barely any exposed skin

Women: Bewbs!!11!!1!1!!1!!!one! And belly buttons!!1!!11! lolz guys, I can put boobies into my army! my life is complete!11 Nothing like sacrificing armor for looks, on a friggin battlefield.

Stay away from the hair styles that remind us of anime. Stick to more functional hair, i.e.; pulled back or chopped, like as in not even trying to make it look good, short.

For armor, why not piecemeal armor for the lower ranks and more decorative/ceremonial for higher ranks. Archers would have specialized leather armor that functions like a modern day sports bra to keep the girls out of the way.

Keep away from the scantily clad fantasy warrior woman image because that is really over done. Also, ditch the leather loin cloth unless you plan on putting some type of fabric underneath it.

These aren't supposed to be true historical models, they represent an Alternate History range, which is a stone's throw from Fantasy anyhow. WGF is a small company and can't afford to release model kits that no one will buy. "Historical" ( ) Amazons, with rugged looks and one breast are a kit that a few history enthusiasts would admire on the retail shelf, but no one would actually buy. Romanticized, pin-up style Amazon models will appeal to fantasy gamers, pulp gamers and hobbyists looking for a basis for female model conversions.

Here's another render of a model from the kit.

SkaerKrow wrote:These aren't supposed to be true historical models, they represent an Alternate History range, which is a stone's throw from Fantasy anyhow. WGF is a small company and can't afford to release model kits that no one will buy. "Historical" ( ) Amazons, with rugged looks and one breast are a kit that a few history enthusiasts would admire on the retail shelf, but no one would actually buy. Romanticized, pin-up style Amazon models will appeal to fantasy gamers, pulp gamers and hobbyists looking for a basis for female model conversions.

Romanticized, pin-up style Amazons is exactly what I was hoping for. Historically inaccurate, mutilated Amazons would appeal to nobody.

The new one is more promising. I could still see a use for the first body, using the right hand drawing the bowstring and the left hand holding the spear and giving her a rifle for a "kneeling preparing to fire" pose, but wouldn't want an entire box of them. If they've got a variety of poses, though, and enough variety of heads that I don't need to keep chopping off pigtails, they might be worth picking up.

The new one's breastplate covers more of her midriff, and looks a lot better. Proper armour or none at all, I say.

I like them for what they are. Fantastical race created to sell to a certain market. Players who want models you can look at.
Historically accurate would not sell in quantities that justify their existence.

The second shown is fairly close to a Greek Hoplite.
Maybe extending the breastplate down and including the bellybutton on it, like the Greeks did would be better.
Maybe they should make the leather strips on the belt longer, more like Roman-style.
The shield seems a little small as well.

I imagine they will have lots of head options, spanning the range between the pigtails and the helmet shown.
This covers the broadest range of customers, I suspect.

That's an improvement on the first pictures but I'm still not digging the bare midriff.

Regards,

V

I'm almost afraid to ask but: are these "fully detailed" under the loin cloth? I'm wondering because the skimpyness of the loincloth makes it an easily viewed area of anatomy on these models...

The last pic with helemts is a vast improvement over the pron anime pigtails.

I doubt it. Remember, these are CAD, not physically sculpted.

Hail, Brothers and Xenos!!!

On my humble opinion, if you gona make amazons, make them like this:
http://diablo3.neoseeker.com/w/i/diablo3/c/c4/Amazon-GameArt.gif

It could not be the "historial, realistic and correct" version of it, but it is the one who looks best.

The models unitl now are not sexy enough, but are good for the Games Factory cheap style...

Look good to me. Proportions aren't over the top. Armor is mostly sensible (though I had missed the whole Xena-bare midriff thing). I'll probably get a box of 'em for Victorian Sci-Fi gaming: what happens with the Queen (Gawd Love 'er) sends her boys to a strange island that appears out of the mists to investigate?

I think more companies like WGF will put the screws ever so gently to GW. i have some Italeria 1/72nd scale minis that have more detail than GW's 28 mm, they were way cheaper, etc. GW can do better. hopefully we get better models as a result of other companies efforts.

WGF Amazonians look bad. They were no such thing as all woman race. How do they reproduce?? They looks lame.

The Dwarf Wolf wrote:Hail, Brothers and Xenos!!!
On my humble opinion, if you gona make amazons, make them like this:
http://diablo3.neoseeker.com/w/i/diablo3/c/c4/Amazon-GameArt.gif

+1

Warboss Narznok wrote:How do they reproduce??

Parthenogenesis?

AlexHolker wrote:

Warboss Narznok wrote:How do they reproduce??

Parthenogenesis?

Actually the myth was that they would visit a neighbor for it's men. Then they would mate with the men, reproduce and if the child was a boy they would either abandon it or give it back to the men.

I can dig on the artistic license of the sculpt but I just don't understand, even in an alternate universe, why it has to devolve down to fantasy warrior chick wearing next to nothing? I think if the sculptors are good enough they can sell the minis based on good sculpts, not the appeal of sexy ladies.

I know it doesn't have to be historical but at least be logical.

How can a sculpt of a female be good and not sexy?

If you are not emphasizing the female aspects of the model, it might as well be male at 28mm.
The body proportions are not overly done on these, not like Werner Klocke's sculpts.
These are athletically toned women.

That second sculpt is pretty good and still feels almost historical.
A longer breastplate covering the stomach, and longer balteus would be perfect.

These will be plastic, so I am not overly worried about the hair. If someone wants military haircuts, they can carve some plastic off.
I want to have the option. Its easier to carve stuff off than to sculpt stuff on.

SkaerKrow wrote:These aren't supposed to be true historical models, they represent an Alternate History range, which is a stone's throw from Fantasy anyhow. WGF is a small company and can't afford to release model kits that no one will buy. "Historical" ( ) Amazons, with rugged looks and one breast are a kit that a few history enthusiasts would admire on the retail shelf, but no one would actually buy. Romanticized, pin-up style Amazon models will appeal to fantasy gamers, pulp gamers and hobbyists looking for a basis for female model conversions.

EXACTLY.

Amazons is miniatures games are almost always of the Fantasy persuation. Well, at least Amazons anyone expects to sell....

As they are now, I'd buy a box to convert for BloodBowl.

I love how people think that a breast needs to be removed to shoot a bow properly, as though there are not women archers currently to see... I mean, good lord people, the olympics are only every 4 years! And Google is forever.

Even assuming you have fun bags the size of midgets, they can be bound down when needed. Even beyond that, ancient Greek bows were not English longbow style weapons drawn back to the ear or cheek. Going to the chest or near shoulder (near to the bow) was generally how it was done. They were extremely light by medieval standards, effective only on very lightly armored troops. Fortunately troops of the period that were not Greek Hoplites were extremely lightly armored, often effectively naked save for basic clothing.

To the model, the last one is best, with a larger breast plate and the bottom of a tunic poking out, perhaps instead of the little belt.

They look as if they've been placed underneath a bright lamp, must be the 3d printing technology...

Malika2 wrote:They look as if they've been placed underneath a bright lamp, must be the 3d printing technology...

Or it might be the bright lamp they're using for photography work.

Increase the coverage of the torso armor and the skirt on that third model and I think it would look a lot better.
The first two from the front page are trash though.

SkaerKrow wrote:Romanticized, pin-up style Amazon models will appeal to fantasy gamers, pulp gamers and hobbyists looking for a basis for female model conversions.

There's realism, and then there's believability. Sure, some people will buy "romanticized, pin-up style" Amazon models. Some people will also refuse to buy giant-lipped Amazonians with silly armour and cheer-leader hair, because they want their Amazon models to actually look competent.

The point is, there's a happy medium that most people will be happy to buy: romanticized Amazons that look sexy because they balance looking feminine with looking like they are capable of actually kicking ass in a fight. WGF don't need to have the breasts cut off (if people want to do that conversion, they can) but they also don't need to make them look completely powerless just to get guys to buy them. If they do, that says some very, very bad things about the people in this hobby.

The standing Amazon "green" is better, but still not perfect. The Corinthian helmet looks too-large to my eyes, especially the parts above the hairline. Which makes it look like the Amazon uses armor built for men despite it not fitting perfectly. Which would be cool, but is completely undermined by the form-fitting breast plate.

I say the coverage of the breast plate strikes a good balance of coverage, but needs to be less form-fitting. At the moment it looks like she has a special blacksmith dedicated to casting bronze armour that perfectly matches her cup size. If they made it so the line of the breasts on the armour and the line of the real breasts under the armour didn't match up perfectly and increased the thickness on top so it didn't look like like cloth, they'd have things about perfect. Above the waist anyway.

Below the waist is still a mess. Either she needs to wear nothing on her ass, or she needs some proper clothes. This leather-strap loin cloth thing just doesn't work. I'd totally support a naked-between-the-breast-plate-and-greaves look, but I suspect that may have it's own sales issues. So better would be to go with a skirt like this:


Then they could leave off the trousers and still have something vaguely historical, feminine, and believably practical. And with the pleats, you'd also have something a that would be more fun to paint.

Warboss Narznok wrote:WGF Amazonians look bad. They were no such thing as all woman race. How do they reproduce?? They looks lame.

Ugg go smash now?

Cross-Your-Heart armor is a fixture of the fantasy genre. It's a symptom of trying to balance the disparate elements of sex appeal and believability. Is it ridiculous? Yes, but female models in wholly realistic armor tend to look very dull (a sentiment echoed by the dozen or so female gamers and hobbyists that I've known). Beyond that, let's not pretend that the armor for all male miniatures is well designed (massive shoulder pads? "My broadbelt and bracers will save me from harm" guy?). Many lightly armored warriors in history went into battle wearing nothing but chest armor; these just do so in highly stylized chest plates.

Pigtails, though silly, are far more practical in combat than just running around with long flowing locks that can obscure vision or be easily grabbed to gain leverage in a struggle. Most fantasy models aren't strictly "competent," that's why they're fantasy models and not historical models. If you want complete believability and practical armor choices, you're barking up the wrong tree.

SkaerKrow wrote:These aren't supposed to be true historical models, they represent an Alternate History range, which is a stone's throw from Fantasy anyhow. WGF is a small company and can't afford to release model kits that no one will buy. "Historical" ( ) Amazons, with rugged looks and one breast are a kit that a few history enthusiasts would admire on the retail shelf, but no one would actually buy. Romanticized, pin-up style Amazon models will appeal to fantasy gamers, pulp gamers and hobbyists looking for a basis for female model conversions.

Frankly, I doubt anyone's going to buy these either. WGF is striking a perfect balance between terrible sculpting and abysmal business sense. They're making fugly models nobody wants.

Agamemnon2 wrote:Frankly, I doubt anyone's going to buy these either. WGF is striking a perfect balance between terrible sculpting and abysmal business sense. They're making fugly models nobody wants.

Please stop with the hyperbole. I don't think their stuff is fugly, and I have purchased a bunch. I am not alone.

There is a market OUTSIDE of GW for these. You know, the entire historical gaming community that has nothing to do with Dakka.
I know people who will quite happily purchase crappy Old Glory Metals, simply because they are vaguely the right period and cheap.

Agamemnon2 wrote:Frankly, I doubt anyone's going to buy these either. WGF is striking a perfect balance between terrible sculpting and abysmal business sense. They're making fugly models nobody wants.

Quite the contrary, Wargames Factory has excellent business sense. They're filling niches in the miniatures hobby that larger companies seem content to turn a blind eye to. Plastic Sci-Fi Greatcoat Infantry? Check. Plastic female miniatures? Check. Even if the kits aren't cutting edge in quality, the conversion opportunities that they present are enough to get them moving off of the shelf.

SkaerKrow wrote:Cross-Your-Heart armor is a fixture of the fantasy genre. It's a symptom of trying to balance the disparate elements of sex appeal and believability. Is it ridiculous? Yes, but female models in wholly realistic armor tend to look very dull (a sentiment echoed by the dozen or so female gamers and hobbyists that I've known). Beyond that, let's not pretend that the armor for all male miniatures is well designed (massive shoulder pads? "My broadbelt and bracers will save me from harm" guy?). Many lightly armored warriors in history went into battle wearing nothing but chest armor; these just do so in highly stylized chest plates.

Make no mistake, my problem isn't with "cross-Your-Heart" armour, by which I assume you mean armour embellished with breasts. My problem is with the breast embellishments exactly matching the cup-size of the wearer. It doesn't so much create a look of fantasy armour as it does create a look of wet t-shirt fantasy. Or rather, that the sculptor just created a basic female form and then just slapped a ridge on to represent the edge of the plate, but didn't actually make the plate any larger than the original body. That's how it looks to me.

Pigtails, though silly, are far more practical in combat than just running around with long flowing locks that can obscure vision or be easily grabbed to gain leverage in a struggle.

I'd like to see the model on the front page try and fit a helmet on. And those pig tails look pretty easy to grab in a fight too. No, there's no excuse for pig tails. The model with the Corinthian helmet got the hair right.

Most fantasy models aren't strictly "competent," that's why they're fantasy models and not historical models. If you want complete believability and practical armor choices, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Here's the big problem for me though. You're trying to say that incompetent female warriors are a necessary component of fantasy. I strongly disagree. Part of what makes the Amazon myth so compelling is that in every depiction I know of the Amazons were absolutely deadly. They turned the world most of the men who encountered them knew on its head. One never knew if they were going to kill you or use you to increase their numbers. An element of danger makes things exciting, even sexier.

By taking away the Amazon's competence, they're effectively being neutered. It turns them not into sexy warrior women, but just sexy girls who play at being warriors. They're decorations and nothing more. These models at the moment rather look like any of the thousands of interchangeable nerd media women who start out trying to look badass but are guaranteed to end up as a damsel in distress before the end of the story, needing a real man to save them. While the thoroughly helpless woman is a component of Fantasy as well, it is not the only valid fantasy involving women and is definitely the wrong way to go with anything claiming to be an Amazon. It says very bad things about the men in this hobby if they feel every model of a woman has to be made helpless-looking to look appealing.

Your mileage may vary, I guess. But it really seems like you're grasping at straws with most of your points (or non-points), there.

This would probably be a better starting point as a reference:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Amazonomachia_Pio-Clementino_Inv896.jpg

Note: two breasts

Also, yea, pig tails are silly. Hair pulled back and bound makes a lot more sense, or cropped shorter, though of course nearly everyone had shoulder length hair then. It seems short cropped hair was not popular until roman times (debatable of course, but that seems to be the case from what I have read.)