Newlines have added quite a bit of stuff for 10mm chariot-era games. Since Pendraken doesn't cover this period, I presume I may mention it here without offence? Especially if it gets us some Pendraken Assyrians....
Very interesting... more so once we see some pics, mind you. I know nothing whatever about Newline minis.
I'm using quite a lot of their stuff with Pendraken figures (and a few I.M. and M.M.) for ancients; more than satisfied.
Though I agree some pictures would be welcome, and I hope they keep their promise to do some Assyrians too, since those are my favourite opponents for the Gyppoes.
Mmmm, they have just told me that the hosts of Assur are on the workbench. :)
Very interesting, I love this period but it's rare for companies to produce much for the bronze age, I've used Old Glory and Magister.
Played a very nice game last week with Hittites facing NKE with the Egyptians just managing a narrow victory.
I've also used Egyptians, Assyrians and Homeric Greeks in Warmaster Ancients competitions with some success although seeing Homeric Greeks facing off against Wars of the Roses Yorkists does look rather anomalous.
Hmmmm, I detest that tendency to warp everything into fantasy. But tell me, thou that knowest, what are those Old Glory figures like? I'm thinking About whether using them would make problems in basing, since they're already in strips.
I may speculate on some Babylonians...
The old glory Egyptians arent bad, the chariots are nice and go together well and the rider and bowman ( one piece casting) actually fit in the chariot. The downside is that the command strip is on a 30mm strip and the troops are on a 35mm strip ( from memory) the bowmen come as single castings
QuoteI detest that tendency to warp everything into fantasy
I generally agree with you, but as long as you treat such games and competitions as nothing more than fantasy games and an interesting way to spend a weekend playing several games with generally decent opponents there's no harm done.
At least that's what I keep telling myself in the wee small hours when I wake up in a cold sweat fearing that my 'Serious Historical Ancients Gamer' credentials could be in doubt.
As for the OG strip question I generally don't find it a problem, only the close order infantry come in strips of 5 figures, all cavalry, archers and light infantry are based as singles. I base all my ancients for WM and find that the strips are too small so I simply cut one or two figures off another strip and add them to the side of the main strip. I've done this hundreds of times and have never had a problem with the stips not cutting easily and cleanly.
For most WM elements of close order infantry using OG strips I generally mount 7 figures on the front of the base and 6 on the rear, slightly off set to look between the front rank however for my Byzantines I went for 8 and 7. One advantage of figures on strips is that they actually look like they are in close order formation, here's a few units of Byzantine Skutatoi and archers
I'll try and get some pictures of the Assyrians sorted out over the weekend but I'm going away so might not manage it until next week.
(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/danandsan/Byz9.jpg) (http://s198.photobucket.com/user/danandsan/media/Byz9.jpg.html)
Quote from: FierceKitty on 02 May 2014, 11:04:06 AM
Hmmmm, I detest that tendency to warp everything into fantasy.
Ahh yes....
Because using toy soldiers speculatively modelled and painted to reflect the limited and undoubtedly inaccurate sources that survive, to play imaginary games that recreate battles that may or may not have taken place, in a manner that they may or may not have been fought, to achieve an outcome we're not certain of is entirely NOT fantasy.
:-\ ;)
Personally i detest the view that pushing some orcs around a purple model forest is somehow inferior to pushing Falsturmjaeger around a model green forest.
:D
QuoteBecause using toy soldiers speculatively modelled and painted to reflect the limited and undoubtedly inaccurate sources that survive, to play imaginary games that recreate battles that may or may not have taken place, in a manner that they may or may not have been fought, to achieve an outcome we're not certain of is entirely NOT fantasy
Of course it's not, our games are detailed simulations of armed conflict through the ages, based on this principle I have, over many years of study, concluded that historically successful generals undoubtably cheated on a regular basis. In fact I can prove that, without a shadow of doubt, Alexander turned up to Gaugamela with at least 3000 points more in his army than he'd previously agreed with Darius.
Quote from: Luddite on 02 May 2014, 02:50:46 PM
Personally i detest the view that pushing some orcs around a purple model forest is somehow inferior to pushing Falsturmjaeger around a model green forest.
Wait, are you saying orcs aren't real???
Well, that would explain why my history teacher was so pissed off when he found me reading Lord of the Rings in his class.
Wow! LotR isn't history ... who knew! ;)
All wargaming is fantasy
You mean like when you use Dendra armour as Daleks?
no cybermen
Quote from: Fenton on 02 May 2014, 03:43:20 PM
All wargaming is fantasy
Too much navel gazing. Just enjoy; and no Nelson jokes!
Quote from: Dour Puritan on 02 May 2014, 08:29:56 PM
Too much navel gazing. Just enjoy; and no Nelson jokes!
I always enjoyed the background and fluff in Navel gaming
Quote from: DanJ on 02 May 2014, 03:14:36 PM
Of course it's not, our games are detailed simulations of armed conflict through the ages, based on this principle I have, over many years of study, concluded that historically successful generals undoubtably cheated on a regular basis. In fact I can prove that, without a shadow of doubt, Alexander turned up to Gaugamela with at least 3000 points more in his army than he'd previously agreed with Darius.
Beware of Greeks bearing loaded dice and fudged roster sheets.
Quote from: Ithoriel on 02 May 2014, 03:20:09 PM
Wait, are you saying orcs aren't real???
I am definitely real ;D
Orcs
Quote from: Just a few Orcs on 03 May 2014, 01:15:53 AM
I am definitely real ;D
Orcs
Second opinion please.......
IanS
We are all just a figment if your warped imaginations!
I know I'm real, the voices told me so. And if I wasn't how does the bank taking money off me, eh?
Virtually ?
Quote from: toxicpixie on 03 May 2014, 11:36:58 AM
I know I'm real, the voices told me so. And if I wasn't how does the bank taking money off me, eh?
I guess it's all made up, I virtually never have any real money on me :D
There was a young man who said, "God
Must think it exceedingly odd
When he finds that this tree
Continues to be
When there's no-one around in the quad."
"Young man, your amazement is odd.
I am always around in the quad;
And therefore this tree
Continues to be,
Observed by, yours faithfully, God."
Reality problems solved, possibly, or not.
Hmmm. God is a sphere with centre everywhere and circumference nowhere, as Pascal observed with more imagination that geometry (it was Pascal, wasn't it?), whereas a quad is of course angular. Does God fit in and so leave non-divine angles as flaws in omnipresence, or does He overlap like a fat man in a small chair? Such wastefulness would suit imProvidence better than Providence.
No wonder religion's on the way out.
I like the limericks but don't subscribe to their content :)
Quote from: Maj Gen von Wedel-Wedelsborg on 05 May 2014, 08:09:51 AM
I like the limericks but don't subscribe to their content :)
I see your point. The Almighty would not use the term "faithfully", would He?
This may be the worst-hijacked post ever.
Nah....Not yet.
Cheers - Phil
Back on track, I tested the Newline 10mm. Decent, quite well detailed & proportioned, but lacking in variety - only 1 pose per pack, barring leaders & banners. They'll add some variety to my existing forces. Look like they'll fit well with Pendraken, MM, etc.
Their peltasts and Celts are two-pose packs.
I sit corrected. I also didn't buy any cavalry, so don't know how good they are. I did buy Sumerian battle carts (can't really call them 'chariots'...), and the animals pulling them look more like ponies than asses...
Thought Sumerian trolleys were pulled by asses, not horses?
Probably because the horses in those days would be nearer donkey size, as domestication and selective breeding hadn't really taken hold yet...
Wish Newline would stick some pictures up,saying that from what I have seen they look identical to their 20mm ranges. I wonder if some clever moulding technique has been used or maybe Sean has invented a shrink ray
Quote from: mad lemmey on 23 May 2014, 06:48:05 AM
Thought Sumerian trolleys were pulled by asses, not horses?
They were, Onagers, apparently - a kind of semi-domesticated ass. But these just don't have the look of an ass, they look like short-maned ponies. I'm not sure what the difference is, but, l know it when I see it...
Quite possible an appropriate paint job (they are quite distinctly coloured) will transform them.
Quote from: Fenton on 23 May 2014, 07:53:41 AM
Wish Newline would stick some pictures up,saying that from what I have seen they look identical to their 20mm ranges. I wonder if some clever moulding technique has been used or maybe Sean has invented a shrink ray
I wish! Shrink me some Mexicans, someone!
At 10mm scale I suspect much of the difference between onagers, donkeys and ponies is in the onager's distinctive coloration
Onager
(http://photos.zoochat.com/medium/onager_whipsnade_3rd_july_2010_a-104021.jpg)
Donkey
(http://www.hamertondonkeystud.com/files//image/genya_left_1.jpg)
Pony
(http://epsdraft.webs.com/braincroft.jpg)
Rather an attractive animal, that.
Silly question, but would Onagers have looked the same in Sumerian times?
They look the same in the carvings, not in colour, of course. Given that they're only semi-domesticated, not much has been done to change them.
Well, change happens in response to natural pressures too, not only to artifice.
Yes, but nothing much has changed in the wild around there, where there still is wild, and they do look the same as the carvings. A few thousand years won't make much difference in evolutionary factors.
I now realise what the problem is with the onagers. It's the tails. The tails on these asses are not asses' tails. They've given them pony tails.
Quick chop with a craft knife to reduce the length? Or are they a bit too moulded on for that...
Quote from: toxicpixie on 24 May 2014, 09:46:11 AM
Quick chop with a craft knife to reduce the length? Or are they a bit too moulded on for that...
It's not the length, it's the... hairiness. Bushiness? Ass tails are short haired all the way to the tuft at the end. These have a full hairy horse tail. I'd have to replace them, very fiddly for this scale!
Well, that's an ass!
Sorry, been waiting to use that line for days! X_X
Early ancients? Wouldn't they be young blades?