Pendraken Feedback

[toxicpixie]

I know, there's a lot in the pipeline and when the pipe is constrained it comes out very slowly!

Just frustration when there's a really nice set of masters shown and they'll be out soon and then... Aren't. Doubly so when other really nice stuff (like the Spanish) seems to sneak out before hand - I don't have a use for them by so tempting but have got to resist

[Chad]

One of the problems as I see it, is that if you are going to produce a new range, you invariably have to produce one or more additional ranges to provide opposition for a war game. The Mongol range needs Chinese, Eastern European Medieval and 13thC Middle Eastern opponents.

Napoleonic period covers such a range of campaigns and armies, that to cover it would require a huge investment by the company ( as would the Mongol 'opposition') . As good as the figures are the 1809 campaign has no interest for me, but I doubt there would be sufficient interest from other members for say 1805-1807 to justify the necessary investment. I therefore have never suggested it.

I would love to do the French Revolution, but the existing range is incomplete (apart from being older castings) and would require expansion to incorporate at least Prussians.

None of this is intended as criticism of Leon and Dave, but as examples of difficulty they face in selecting new ranges.

Chad

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

I would love 1806 Prussains!

[Fenton]

Slightly off topic

But I notice that Eureka have stopped their 100 and 300 clubs due to the popularity of crowdfunding

[Subedai]

One of the problems as I see it, is that if you are going to produce a new range, you invariably have to produce one or more additional ranges to provide opposition for a war game. The Mongol range needs Chinese, Eastern European Medieval and 13thC Middle Eastern opponents.

Chad

In actual fact, as far as I can determine, the only opponents not currently covered in 10mm by anyone are the Russians -but I am open to correction. The Polish and Hungarians can be covered by a mix of early medieval types in ringmail with heater shields, teardrop shields, kite shields and round shields -all types were used. This goes for cavalry as well as the town militia who would be dressed in whatever the town or city could afford. For other infantry, generic peasants or Saxon and Norman figures are more than useful. All of these are already available from Pendraken.
For the Middle East, the Abbasid and Ayyubid dynasties fell in 1258 and 1259 respectively after Baghdad and Damamscus were destroyed by the Ilkhanids so any of those figure types are usable as opponents for the Mongols -the Pendraken Arab range is a good start. (In fact, the Pendraken Arab HC AB9 is close enough to be used as Russian but that's about it). The Arab and Mongol cavalry can be mixed and used as Mamluks or Kipchaq armoured cavalry and any generic Middle Eastern type of mounted archer or even the Mongol LC can be used as Alans, Circassians and other Kipchaq LC. The Khwazimian royal guard were all from the Kangli tribe -one of the Kipchaq group of nomads- so again Arab mixed with Mongols will do more than adequately.
The Chinese are covered by at least one other manufacturer and the models are compatible with Pendraken. (I know, I have shed loads of them.)

Therefore, armed with this information, to my mind it makes perfect economic sense to go with the untapped market of Russians. But as others have already said, the wishes of the few would not justify a complete range.

As far as other new ranges are concerned, carry on.

[Sandinista]

Times like this we need a "like" button as I echo all that Subedai says it that last post 

[Chad]

Subodai

You are very fortunate to have the option of filling in from other ranges and having a compatible other manufacturer available. This is not a position that all of us can enjoy. Do all members who purchased the Mongol range know of the fill-in figures and the compatible manufacturer?

Taking Lemmey's point about 1806 Prussians. You would then need Saxons (unless you ignore Jena) and early Russians (unless you ignore Eylau). Then you would have to determine how many of the Revolutionary era French would be suitable with the possibility that additional figures would be needed. Austerlitz would present a similar problem, requiring early Russians. It does not make perfect economic sense in such situations. There are alternative manufacturers, but some are (a) incomplete ranges and (b) incompatible.

Another example are the Prussians for 1815. The line would be fine for 1813, but are the Reserve regiments going to be produced for that campaign?

Chad

[Subedai]

Subodai

You are very fortunate to have the option of filling in from other ranges and having a compatible other manufacturer available. This is not a position that all of us can enjoy. Do all members who purchased the Mongol range know of the fill-in figures and the compatible manufacturer?

I agree I am fortunate, but this is not the first time that I have posted this information. When the Mongols first came out I mentioned that other ranges were usable for all but Russians. To my mind, research is an integral part of the hobby concerning all aspects of both the historical army and also the availability of figures, if necessary sourcing them from a number of manufacturers as and when required. I would like to think that purchasers of the Mongol range who had already made the commitment to use them as medieval Mongols and not in a fantasy or other period would have had one eye on enemies. The information is out there, research will find it, or, with the number of forums on wargaming, someone will have the information they are willing to share...and I include myself in that category.   

Taking Lemmey's point about 1806 Prussians. You would then need Saxons (unless you ignore Jena) and early Russians (unless you ignore Eylau). Then you would have to determine how many of the Revolutionary era French would be suitable with the possibility that additional figures would be needed. Austerlitz would present a similar problem, requiring early Russians. It does not make perfect economic sense in such situations. There are alternative manufacturers, but some are (a) incomplete ranges and (b) incompatible.

Another example are the Prussians for 1815. The line would be fine for 1813, but are the Reserve regiments going to be produced for that campaign?

Chad

Going back to my point above, all of your comments are something that the individual should take into account when they embark on a new period. I just briefly looked at my copy of Jena - Auerstadt, The Triumph of the Eagle and immediately concluded that in 10mm, SYW Prussian infantry would work for Saxons and any generic hussar in a mirliton would be okay for Saxon hussars. (Or you could check out the Eureka site they do all the AB figures). If nobody makes a particular range then there is probably a good economical reason why not, after all, no manufacturer whose livelihood is based on sales is going to commission a range that will -to all intents and purposes- not be a 'seller', unless of course they are a Lottery winner who does it for fun. (I can dream can't I?)

This point is also relevant for Prussians. The Reserve regiments wore such diverse uniforms to start with and after a few months in the field they would be wearing anything they could get their hands on so you could probably use a shirtless civilian figure from a medieval range and he would not look too much out of place. More seriously, the British supplied a lot of uniforms to the Prussians so Peninsular stovepipe shako wearers are useful, French tunics and shako's were also worn so it could be that only a different paint job is required.

I think, and I make this as a generalisation rather than aimed at any individual, that wargamers today are so spoilt for choice that sometimes they either can't be ar*ed or think that their time is too important to waste it on research for anything. It's getting like a fast food takeaway, they want it immediately so it goes from the packet to the table with none of the boring intermediate stages like painting. To me, that is a massive loss because all aspects of the hobby are an important means to an end.

[Ithoriel]

As primarily a wargamer who sees figures, first and foremost, as gaming pieces I am amazed and amused by the angst expended on the accuracy of figures.

Having been brought up on,"Black hat, red jacket, white trousers - British. Black hat, blue jacket, white trousers - French" because there were so few sources of figures I'd have said,"Type of shako? Position of cartridge box? Sword or bayonet? Who cares!" but it turns out that the answer to that question is,"Far more people than I'd realised!!"

Here's hoping 2015 brings at least some of you at least some of the figures you are looking for.

I'm off to turn some 6mm New Kingdom Egyptian swordsmen into Sumerian Guardsmen, I'll (eventually) post pics if that works. Though at the rate I'm painting these days it may depend on my living long enough to finish them

[Subedai]

As primarily a wargamer who sees figures, first and foremost, as gaming pieces I am amazed and amused by the angst expended on the accuracy of figures.

Having been brought up on,"Black hat, red jacket, white trousers - British. Black hat, blue jacket, white trousers - French" because there were so few sources of figures I'd have said,"Type of shako? Position of cartridge box? Sword or bayonet? Who cares!" but it turns out that the answer to that question is,"Far more people than I'd realised!!"

Here's hoping 2015 brings at least some of you at least some of the figures you are looking for.

I'm off to turn some 6mm New Kingdom Egyptian swordsmen into Sumerian Guardsmen, I'll (eventually) post pics if that works. Though at the rate I'm painting these days it may depend on my living long enough to finish them

Keep plugging away, they should be fun to see.

I am assuming that like me you hail from an earlier age of wargaming where if you wanted anything in lead apart from British or French Napoleonics, the odd ancient Roman or Greek etc, you either tried converting or looked at Airfix for inspiration. To me, even now if it looks close enough then that's exactly what it is...close enough and I'm not going to quibble -especially in 10mm, I'll leave that to the annoying sh*ts of the rivet counting persuasion.

[Leman]

I also agree, having happily wargamed in the 60s with Airfix WWI French masquerading as ACW zouaves - banana oil et al.

[Orcs]

As primarily a wargamer who sees figures, first and foremost, as gaming pieces I am amazed and amused by the angst expended on the accuracy of figures.

Having been brought up on,"Black hat, red jacket, white trousers - British. Black hat, blue jacket, white trousers - French" because there were so few sources of figures I'd have said,"Type of shako? Position of cartridge box? Sword or bayonet? Who cares!" but it turns out that the answer to that question is,"Far more people than I'd realised!!"

I totally agree.  I have a large  10mm Dacian army - basically a warband army so by adding and removing a few units I can morph it into , Gallic, Ancient British ,Germanic.  Yes sometimes the shield may be incorrect and the archers may need to count as warband , but none of my opponents has worried about that.

[Orcs]

Pendraken need to produce what is comercially viable.

It may well be better to produce a complete new range than add specialised figures into ranges., that will only sell limited quantities.

[toxicpixie]

"Range X simply isn't complete without figure Y" where Y will sell precisely one figure per set of people playing... Must strike fear into the hearts of figure makers everywhere...

[Sandinista]

I am assuming that like me you hail from an earlier age of wargaming where if you wanted anything in lead apart from British or French Napoleonics, the odd ancient Roman or Greek etc, you either tried converting or looked at Airfix for inspiration. To me, even now if it looks close enough then that's exactly what it is...close enough and I'm not going to quibble -especially in 10mm, I'll leave that to the annoying sh*ts of the rivet counting persuasion.

I totally agree 

Cheers
Ian