Please is there any chance of remodelling this range as I am considering creating 10mm armies, but at the moment your range of figures does not set me on fire. A range to match the existing 15mm at 10mm would be excellent.

Yours

Ironsides

That is interesting as it had the opposite effect on me, I am in the middle of a heavy investment in 10mm ECW inspired by the figures.

Yes, taste is a curious thing. Most of my ECW hosts are the old 12mm AIM figures now available from Caliver, but I love the new Pendraken TYW horse figures, which fit in perfectly with them.  My generals, are all Old Glory, because they are really the only ones available, but I don't like their strip infantry and the cavalry and dragoons are rather small compared to AIM (although I have some hundreds of them unpainted!). The main thing that put me off the Pendraken were the Pikemen, who look like they are armed with a short spear.  Love Pendraken 10mm SYW and Marlburian and 19th century, this range just doesn't do it for me.   Chacun a son gout, as someone once said!

Mollinary

I'm with Ironside and Mollinary, I have the FOG rules and I have bought two starter armies. The rules are gathering dust on the book shelf and the figures are consigned to the huge pile of figures marked as shall I

I mentioned a while ago that the cavalry in particular were lacking a little animation and the size difference between figure codes was noticable. The trouble is, we have been spoilt with the newer ranges with both the detail and variety. Perhaps a few tweaks could be achieved.

Bertie.

We need some of the other figures, nations, armies etc that nobody makes. EVERYONE makes ECW figures; it's the easiest pike and shot period to raise. Can't we first get some 16th and 17th century Chinese, Koreans, Burmese, the Japanese that everyone ignores, Aztecs, Cossacks....? Pretty please with sugar on top and black powder in an apostle beside the salt?

Don't mention the Aztecs

*sneaks away*

I can't see this one being done unfortunately, this range has always been one of our consistent sellers.

They look great painted up as well:

But those pikes cannot be more than a scale 10-11 feet long, surely?

Mollinary

http://www.pendraken.co.uk/LOA11-p6174/

Quote from: mollinary on 13 June 2011, 08:16:14 AM
But those pikes cannot be more than a scale 10-11 feet long, surely?

Mollinary

During the civil war many troops hacked off a sizeable chunk off the foot of the pike to make it easier to carry (plus supplimenting the woodpile) so short is not too much of an issue for me

I second that; especially by 1644 the majority of Pike had been chopped down considerably, and the punishment for doing so had been waivered in most cases. Pendraken ECW pikes are thus actually realistically more accurate than the standard assumption of the long poled pike, which was being phased out fast between 1643-49

I vaguely remembered reading about cut down pikes but it was so long ago was not sure it it referred to the ECW or not.

Quote from: Sandinista on 13 June 2011, 11:01:31 AM
.... so short is not too much of an issue for me

It's his wife I feel sorry for.

Quote from: FierceKitty on 13 June 2011, 01:15:08 PM
  It's his wife I feel sorry for.

We could maybe drill the pikes out of some of the figures and offer them empty handed?

Quote from: Leon on 13 June 2011, 04:11:40 PM
We could maybe drill the pikes out of some of the figures and offer them empty handed?

Noooo, I like them as they are

I wouldn't replace the current codes, but we could add them as alternatives at the end of the listings.

OK Guys, I hear what you say about cut down pikes..........but, if I recall correctly that is an extrapolation from a remark by Monck(??) on what a bad practice it was.   I haven't seen any evidence as to how widespread the practice was, nor on how much was cut off, nor that it followed through into post war practice in the following decades.  If anyone has such evidence I would be most interested in having a look.  I know lots of stuff has been uncovered by keen re-enactors in local archives, but I haven't seen much published.  But maybe I'm reading the wrong books?   Leon, I wouldn't go to the trouble of open handed unless others share my concern, which on the evidence so far they dont!  That said,  as a general rule open handed figures do give you choice.  Decisions decisions!

Mollinary

I am quite happy with the infantry as they are. But what about the mounted figures. Can we not have a more dynamic lobster pot figure with pistols and one with a sword. Same for the soft hat figure. It would also help classify troop types with the rules I  would like to use.

What do you say Leon? not replace, but expand on a high selling range.

Bertie.

Quote from: Bertie on 14 June 2011, 07:44:09 PM
I am quite happy with the infantry as they are. But what about the mounted figures. Can we not have a more dynamic lobster pot figure with pistols and one with a sword. Same for the soft hat figure. It would also help classify troop types with the rules I  would like to use.

What do you say Leon? not replace, but expand on a high selling range.

It's probably something we'd like to do at some point, but there's no timescales.