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.

Wrong thread.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 kodos wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
would the sounds of 3000 wings be audible over the sounds of shouting, gun/cannon fire, the sounds of the horses galloping, steel clashing with steel, or any of the other sounds of a battlefield?
Probably not.

by looking at what the charge distance of cavalry is, the rate of fire of guns and how far bacḱ cannon usually were, yes the infantry charged would hear it

I remember reading the same thing but that may just have been GW rules rather than rigorously researched history and tactics.

It is possible of course that the Polish used the wings because they thought they would make a terrifying noise when charging (I bet it sounded great to the lancers themselves) but never really conducted detailed exit interviews with the unit that got charged to confirm they could hear it

I have heard from the history professor who for sure had nothing do to with GW rules of any kind

yet we don't even know how the wings really looked like, we have leftovers from their armour and weapons so know what they used but not really anything from the wings
hence we cannot know which sound they made or if they made a sound at all

and the main reason to use it (as I wrote above) was because it looked cool

Y'all know that terrifying noise you hear when a flock of birds is gliding overhead?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Y'all know that terrifying noise you hear when a flock of birds is gliding overhead?

I imagine it's more that VRRRR of holding a sheet of paper by a fan.

I can believe the winged lancers had a psychological effect. But just because its supposed to sound intimidating doesn't mean it does, however it could be a placebo for the horseman who thinks the enemy is scared by the sound, and my later attribute the fear he sees in the eyes of the foe during a lance charge to the feathers on his back.

There is a similar thinking behind why the British and the Romans both wore scarlet. Its a 'scary' colour.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 OldMate wrote:


A recreation of what it must have sounded like (starting at 1:22).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn37QfXw1-E

Sorry guys, how could I resist?
Besides, I know you love it.
.

I just got sort of rick rolled, as if rick rolling led to something good. Yes I stayed to watch the entire clip.

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
Anyway, I definitely read *one* claim that the winged bits were useful for war 'cos they supposedly made a lot of noise to scare enemy horses. Not very convincing -- battles would surely always be noisy, and warhorses trained to cope -- but interesting. Supposedly the leopardskin saddle throws served a similar function, scaring enemy horses because predator smell...

That is an old, dumb myth by one writer who never actually rode horse or saw birds fly (hint, wings are supposed to be QUIET, warning predators/prey is last thing birds want). Ditto for 'predator smell' nonsense. Funnily enough he is also the dude to start 'two wings on back' myth - today, most researchers think a wing (singular) was mounted on saddle, not back, and was supposed to make the rider visually larger/scarier and help protect him from tatar lassos (however that was supposed to work). Much like DA bikers in fact:



Funnily enough, main psychological warfare instrument they used according to new research is very long banner on tip of lance (2-3 meters long, but thin) that was supposed to twirl furiously during charge unnerving opposing horses - which is curiously absent from most ignorant depictions of them, go figure

 kodos wrote:
by looking at what the charge distance of cavalry is, the rate of fire of guns and how far bacḱ cannon usually were, yes the infantry charged would hear it

You are aware that hussars actually had a carbine (or two pistols) they fired during charge, and infantry cannons used by russian, turkish, or swedish opponents back then had rather small range so were placed in the front, yes? That alone would make the wing argument nonsense, even without considering massed handgun fire and noise made by tons of horses with armour during charge?

 kodos wrote:
yet we don't even know how the wings really looked like, we have leftovers from their armour and weapons so know what they used but not really anything from the wings
hence we cannot know which sound they made or if they made a sound at all

Fun fact - most of 'genuine' armour with wings had them added in XIX or XX century. Because they were 'supposed' to have them. Pristine armor without modifications with them is unknown.

And um, yes we do because reenactors and movies are a thing. Both tried to replicate 'noise' and failed:



[before someone asks, literally nothing here is historically accurate in any way]

 kodos wrote:


one thing we know for sure is that the wings were mounted on the rider and not on the horse

I think I read about a year ago in a historical part of one of the weekly magazines from my country that historians believe that the wings were actually not mounted on the person but on the horse. The rider ones are from parades not the battlefield.

I think Hussars regardless of historical accuracy are just popular because just like Cataphracts and others, they're just a cool and unique-looking versions of Knighs on horseback.

Need ya'll to vote for Sci-Fi Scouts/Snipers as they're my Not-Tanith/Gaunt's Ghosts entry

I question how Hussar fans expect anyone to make Hussar minis if apparently science does not know what a Hussar looked like.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I question how Hussar fans expect anyone to make Hussar minis if apparently science does not know what a Hussar looked like.

I guess most of hussars fans want a cool looking winged rider smashing an enemy line to paste. Historical accuracy is less important. BTW I have no problem with that

 judgedoug wrote:
Need ya'll to vote for Sci-Fi Scouts/Snipers as they're my Not-Tanith/Gaunt's Ghosts entry

By the time the design gets finalized and all the poll takers have their say, your not-Tanith may end not end up looking very Tanith.

I voted for them assuming they would have holo-gillie suits or something.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 judgedoug wrote:
Need ya'll to vote for Sci-Fi Scouts/Snipers as they're my Not-Tanith/Gaunt's Ghosts entry

By the time the design gets finalized and all the poll takers have their say, your not-Tanith may end not end up looking very Tanith.

I voted for them assuming they would have holo-gillie suits or something.

Yeah, I honestly assumed it was a request for "totally not Space Marine Scouts", but with a kit that isn't 20 years old.

Annoyingly they excised the word "Cloak" after the word "Camouflage" in the full title "Sci-Fi Scouts/Snipers in Camouflage Cloaks" but having chatted with Hudson previously about them, he should at least be subconsciously aware.

I just assumed someone needed literally one sniper for their Stargrave crew and figured forcing a 20 man box of them and then not buying it would be the optimal approach, like I suspect most of the non-historical entries will go. The word cloaks wouldn't have made it any clearer.

 judgedoug wrote:
Annoyingly they excised the word "Cloak" after the word "Camouflage" in the full title "Sci-Fi Scouts/Snipers in Camouflage Cloaks" but having chatted with Hudson previously about them, he should at least be subconsciously aware.

Consolation prize?



Not perfect, but it's a good place to start...

 KidCthulhu wrote:
Consolation prize?

Spoiler:

[img]https://i.imgur.com/bCrr4HT.jpg[/img







]

Not perfect, but it's a good place to start...

By that measure there is the Border World Rangers 10 Man Squad, but I'd guess JudgeDoug wants a 24 figure plastic kit at $34.95, as opposed to the ten resin figures at $49.99. Cheaper and easier to build up the Tanith First and Only with the former as opposed to the latter.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I just assumed someone needed literally one sniper for their Stargrave crew and figured forcing a 20 man box of them and then not buying it would be the optimal approach, like I suspect most of the non-historical entries will go. The word cloaks wouldn't have made it any clearer.

Hmmm. I would have thought the opposite. Especially with a boom of sci fi games that encourage buying a variety of kits for conversions.

They have said on their Facebook feed that there are far more Sci fi gamers than historical gamers. I guess it comes down to how many Sci fi gamers buy one box for fun vs how many historical players happened to want one or more than one box with this particular jacket with these particular buttons in this particular period.

So is there going to be a 3rd and final round?

At this point cause I think I've been sounding super hostile I feel like I should say that I'm not going to nag if a historical kit wins that isn't already readily available in plastic, especially anything... "indigenous"

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
So is there going to be a 3rd and final round?

Yes. If you read their commentary under the 4th round of the 2nd Heat, they will keep the voting open for a few days more, then they'll take the top ten for the final vote.

Since this forum is mainly sci-fi/fantasy, not historical, the complaints have been mainly "too many historicals, especially of stuff that already exists in plastic". When I read the comments posted below the WGA blog post, there were a lot of "too many sci-fi suggestions, not enough historicals."

Got two questions for the forum. How many historical miniature gamers do you know (including yourself if applicable)? Next question: Of those historical miniature gamers, how many of them still game at 25mm or 28mm, and thus would be interested in WGA making 28mm plastic kits?

I started as a 25mm Napoleonics mini gamer, but currently only play fantasy (KoW & KoW: Vanguard + Frostgrave), and some Sci-fi (Dropzone Commader, Kill Team, hopefully Stargrave soon). So my answer to the first question is "1".

Second question, the answer is also "1", with the stipulation of it would have to be for a skirmish level wargame. Not really interested building a full Corps in 28mm for something like Napoleonics. Also, before the local historical mini groups died of old age (often literally!), they were using 15mm, or 1/285th scale microarmor. No 25mm players any more, including the ones that introduced me to the hobby. So odds are that if historical mini gaming restarted in my part of SoCal, it would be at a scale that WGA does not make. Maybe it's different elsewhere, but here WGA has few customers (if any) for their historical kits.

There's a fringe group playing 28mm Warhammer Historical in my city somewhere.

I'd buy the odd kit for conversions, Sludge/Turnip, random savages, etc.

My brother’s wife’s biological father plays some kind of historical game as part of a group, but I never got a chance to ask him about it. From various second- or third- hand sources it sounds like he plays 54mm Civil War, or maybe 15mm WW2, or maybe 28mm “the thing with the guys with the cannon.”

My brother buys some WW2 stuff, but not in 28mm.

I know Highlord Tamurlaine, who buys 28mm historicals, but he can tell his own tale.

Other than them, I’m the only one I know who regularly buys 28 mm historical miniatures.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
My brother’s wife’s biological father plays some kind of historical game as part of a group, but I never got a chance to ask him about it. From various second- or third- hand sources it sounds like he plays 54mm Civil War, or maybe 15mm WW2, or maybe 28mm “the thing with the guys with the cannon.”

My brother buys some WW2 stuff, but not in 28mm.

I know Highlord Tamurlaine, who buys 28mm historicals, but he can tell his own tale.

Other than them, I’m the only one I know who regularly buys 28 mm historical miniatures.

I could see them used in stargrave with some head swaps and do like they did on the first episode of ST:TNG with strange animal things dressed up in historical uniforms, but I have no interest in replaying historic battles.

I buy 28mm historicals (but I don't game with them), although the dated/ropey sculpting on a lot means I don't get lured in as much as I do my sf & fantasy

What Wargames Atlantic should do is start producing 32mm historicals.

28mm miniatures either have to have exaggerated features in order to be paintable (like Frostgrave minis with enormous heads and hands and tiny little torsos), or they just end up being too small to paint to a high standard (like Perry miniatures).

Historical miniatures moved from 25mm to 28mm over time, why not move to 32mm?

I personally do not find 28mm miniatures pleasant to paint or convert. I would buy a lot more historical kits in 32mm.

There are not ANY 32mm Romans on the market.

 Ancestral Hamster wrote:
Since this forum is mainly sci-fi/fantasy, not historical, the complaints have been mainly "too many historicals, especially of stuff that already exists in plastic". When I read the comments posted below the WGA blog post, there were a lot of "too many sci-fi suggestions, not enough historicals."

Got two questions for the forum. How many historical miniature gamers do you know (including yourself if applicable)? Next question: Of those historical miniature gamers, how many of them still game at 25mm or 28mm, and thus would be interested in WGA making 28mm plastic kits?

Given the first point, what do you expect to get in terms of useful information from the second one?

Personally never seen any non-28mm historicals played locally aside from Flames of War I think. SAGA, Bolt Action, Warhammer Historicals, Hail Caesar/Pike and Shotte, whatever rulesets they were using for Napoleonics, En Garde/Ronin, some pirate skirmish game, Lion Rampant, Gangs of Rome... all stuff I've seen over the last few years, all 28mm.

The majority of projects on an actual historicals forum also appear to be 28mm: https://leadadventureforum.com/index.php
If anything, the slow increase in available plastics has made 28mm more popular I'd say. At least some previous disadvantages of metal (cost/weight) for larger armies have disappeared, making 28mm more feasible where you might have gone 10-15mm before. Plus more accessible to people more familiar with plastics who entered the hobby via GW of course.

GWs minis aren't 28mm anymore, haven't been for years, so if you want "accessibility for people who entered the hobby via GW" then it would make sense for WGA to upscale its releases to 32mm, which is more in line with the scale that 40k and Age of Sigmar are being produced in these days (and presumably also the scale that The Old World will end up being in unless they do the smart thing and make them 10-15mm scaled minis XD ).

Most of the historicals "industry" however is holding fast to "proper" 28mm (15mm ranges notwithstanding) for inter-compatability reasons with one anothers kits, etc. as it does little good to make a French Napoleonic Grenadiers kit in GW scaled 32mm when everone elses Napoleonics kits are a noticeable 12.5% smaller - unless you have the resources to invest into launching an entire product range at once (i.e. a dozen or more kits covering the core of a French and English Napoleonic army), followed by regular expansion (i.e. 3-4 additional kits per month), its probably not a smart business move - something GW is no doubt very cognizant of as they are the only business in the industry with the capability to actually do that at the moment, hence why they've scaled up their minis in order to build a "moat" that will take competitors a significant amount of time and investment to overcome if they want to get into the business of peddling "alternative" minis that can be used to build 40k/AoS/Old World armies, etc. The lifespan on Les Grognards range is going to be limited to however long it takes GW to revamp its Astra Militarum/guard plastics basically, at which point Les Grognards will look like really fancy Ratlings.

The flip side of this, of course, is that if you did have the resources you could potentially make a killing by building out a 32mm range of historicals and generic scifi/fantasy plastics, etc. as it would open up inter-compatability avenues with GWs range that the established 28mm market is currently running short on.

Man I do not envy these fringe companies always walking a tightrope between "You're just copying GW" and "I'm not buying that because I can't use it for Warhammer"

Minis gamers in general, and GW hobbyists in particular, are somewhat "bipolar" in that way, where a product is worthless unless it has immediate use to them in whatever game they prefer to play, but if its too similar (or maybe "too useful" is more accurate) then its blatant IP theft and you're a bad person for making it. Its definitely a tightrope balancing act, though I think most people working in that space are less concerned with the frothings of rapid fanboys than they are avoiding a C&D from GW itself.

Arguably the Eisenkern/Dreamforge line struggled in large part because many felt the Eisenkern infantry were too tall and not equipped properly to proxy for guard armies (didn't stop me XD, ironically - unless WGA is downsizing them, this makes them the perfect height for nu-hammer) while the Leviathans were too small to stand in for Warhounds but too large to stand in for Knights. Likewise lots of other minis ranges have come and gone over the years because something about them made them non-useful as a GW proxy, though generally that seems to only really be an issue if you don't have a ruleset of your own backing the minis line (although that compatibility definitely helps drive sales even if you do have a ruleset).

I think the "you're just copying GW" bit has become less prevalent as time has gone on though, you still see it pop up from time to time, often in connection to things that aren't at all copies of something GW has done, but rather things that capture the "aesthetic" or "essence" of something relating to GWs designs while still being wholly unique. I think the attitude is more prevalent among GW/wargaming newcomers (i.e. people who haven't yet encountered wargaming outside of the GW hobby) and don't really know that other minis lines or games exist, and have maybe heard whispered rumors about the existence of recasters but don't really know what they are other than being bad, etc. and then when they encounter non-GW minis for the first time they react with hostility.