Figure requirements for GA/LoA

[Spiraluk]

Hi All

If anyone can help me out its you guys. I am currently working on a range of 28mm figs to cover the Grand Alliance/League of Augsberg. Not the easiest of periods to get info about as most of you know.

From what I have managed to grasp so far is that most uniforms were the same from counrty to country, so you bog basic infantry man is a fairly generic figure. Would you agree?
I've also seen plates and some figures, that show buttons and button -, that run all the way up the back of the skirt. Was this common or particular to one army?

Any help on the above or any tips/wants you may have would be more than welcome

Regards
Bill Thornhill
Musketeer Miniatures

[barr7430]

Hi Bill,

some big questions in there! I think it really depends on what scale you are designing the figures in. If it is 15mm or smaller then some of the fine distinguidhing detail will not matter. Maybe if you let me have a little more info on your
1. target scale
2. focus for the the miniatures(ie Foot or Horse or dragoons etc).
3. Are you trying to compliment existing ranges ie Front Rank, Dixons, Foundry, Old Glory etc or start from scratch. The reason I ask this is that perhaps there is a niche here for un available models. If you design stuff which is very commonly available now and people have well established collections they are very often reluctant to include NEW stuff or start again.
There are however MANY GAPS in this period which I think Collectors would respond to very positively if they were filled.

I noticed some of the 17th/18th Century Buffs on this Forum in the US were looking to start lobbying designers/manufacturers to fill the gaps. Maybe a tie in there

It would be good to hear from the likes of Bill Amick, Lindsay Gauld, 18th Century Guy, Bob Miller et al about their views. Lots of interest here in the UK too!

Give us some more to go on Bill!!!

[Anonymous]

below is a post from earlier with replies.The intention of the meeting at Historicon is to discuss maunufacture of miniatures by various manufactures and sculptors. The intend being to fill gaps in ranges already on release. The scale being compatible with Dixon, Foundry and Imperialist Miniatures which is 25mm


Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 94
Location: Rural West Virginia
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:35 am Post subject: What kind and types of figures are most required.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I intend to talk to some manufacturers and sculptors at Historicon vis a vis
getting figures made for the period 1680-1707.
That will be compatible with Foundry, Old Glory, Imperialist Enterprises and Dixon. I have been told there are a lot missing types like cavalry, pike etc. Now remember to get figures manufactured etc they will need information in the form of pictures drawings etc as regards uniforms etc. It is impossible to describe complete figures by word and expect a sculptor regardless how good he is to know exactly what is needed. So firstly we have to define what is missing from the ranges available and then see if we collectivley have enough information that a sculptor can work with.Needless to say that there must be a market for figures too.Two years ago I was luck enough to find a friend interested in a Macbeth army and we managed to get 200 Highland Islesmen cast for us by Nic Robson of Eureka( two figures with about 4 varations of each in head type and dress). He is one of the people I will be speaking to amongst others he is also a very nice guy and a wargamer .He has run the 100 club at Eureka successfullly for a number of years and produced some minitures unavailable by other manufacturers.Large productions runs mean a minimum of 150 figures of a type so this requires thought. He is not the only person I will be speaking too but just so everyone knows whats happening I will post a full report after Historicon. I will sort out all the requests and post them here before going to Historicon providing we have enough of an interest and information.
Please email me directly at so I can more easily post the list to the forum.
scotia123135@msn.com.
Regards Lindsay
_________________
"..He either fears his fate too much,
Or his deserts are small.
That puts it not unto the touch,
To win or lose it all." James Graham "

Back to top


conflans



Joined: 26 Feb 2005
Posts: 9
Location: Houston, Texas
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 9:36 pm Post subject: Figures

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lindsay,

The Osprey book on the Army of Louis XIV features a plate showing French cavalry, see plate C, one of which sports a buffcoat. I have read that Savoyard cavalry wore these buffcoats well into the League of Augsburg period and possibly into the Marlburian period. The same plate features a musketeer with shorter cuffed sleeves and a sleeved waistcoat. These figures are also needed. Figure 4b, page 42, in Grant's "From Pike to shot..." features a good, generic unarmored pikeman.

Prior to talking to the sculptors, you might also want to obtain the Osprey book on the Battle of the Boyne (release date July 10, 2005). It will feature some good plates depicting troops of the period. You can see a small sized sample on the Osprey site.

Also, if you go to the Researching & Dragona site, "laminas" section, they have some pictures of Milanese soldiers of the period. I believe that these figures could represent Spanish troops in any theater as well as other smaller countries.

For the Marlburian period, see Robert Hall's work on the Palatine army. Their unique infantry with swallows nest, cartidge box and belly box have not been reproduced.

Finally, cavalry with hanging sleeves as depicted in Mark Allen's article on the Dutch cavalry in Wargames Illustrated, no. 173, plate one, p. 16 would be most appreciated.

If you don't have access to any of this material, e-mail me off-list and I'll see if I can get copies to you.

Bob Miller

Back to top


barr7430
Site Admin


Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 273
Location: EK,Scotland
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 2:29 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

few suggestions from my side:

multi use types with open hands who might serve as artillerymen, sappers or pikemen.

Figures in more natural poses as opposed to some of the stiff and standard wargamey poses.

Campaign dress types looking a little scruffy with socks down at ankles, packs, pots etc hanging from belts.

A genuine range of personality figures(which I think would sell);

William III
King James
Louis XIV
Eugene
Cutts
Tyrconnel
Mackay
Sarsfield
Slagenburg
Luxembourg
Schomberg
Claverhouse

[Spiraluk]

Hi Guys

Thanks for the tips so far. I confess to being fairly virginal to this period, as I was originally going to start my ranges with the Great Northern War. Unfortunatly, due to Barry and Phils wonderful site I've been drawn to the GA/LoA.

I hope to make my range as dynamic and varied as possible. I will have to start with bog basic Infantry type, as no range can be without them. I am wide open for suggestions as to more unusual troops, as long as it's more than 2 people buying them!

I like the idea of a campaign feel to troops. The easy way of doing this from a production point of view, is to make the parade ground figures first and then convert them to a campaign figure afterwards. This is what I'll aim to do. As stated, I want them to have a dynamic feel about them. The time of the stiff standing figure has passed I believe, so I will try and make them as fluid as my talent will allow. I'm starting with the foot first. The fist packs will be as follows;

Standing ready
Standing at ease
Advancing
Charging

Each figure will have 4 head varients. The campaign figures will have individual changes made to each 4 figs. One thing I am trobled by is the whole hat style thing. What do you guys think? One side up (Which one?) two sides up, three...? Another problem is how to equip them. I'm using the French as my main model of refrence at the moment. I will be doing them with both Flintlocks and Matchlocks. Pike will be both armoured and unarmoured. do I need to do them with apostles? I don't think so, but you guys might know better.

As for characters, I fully agree that they are a welcome addition to any range of figures, but the reason nobody makes them, is that the amount of time it takes to sculpt a single character, is often twice as long as a normal figure. This mainly due to the sculptor trying to capture much more detail in the figure to make it as accurate as possible. When you think that you will only sell one of each figure to each gamer out there, you can see why people shy away from doing them. I will include characters in my range, but the list might not end up quite as large as most people would like.

The scale thing was a bit of a quandry for me as I have always sculpted in true 28mm rather than true 25mm. At the moment, the dolls I have made are all 28mm, but with shrinkage during the moulding processes, this may drop a mm or possibly 2mm. Until I make the final production figures I won't know for certain.

[wbamick]

Hi Guys,

Just some random notes regarding figures. While this may sound heretical, based upon my own views and correspondence with and articles written by Barry I am not sure that there are that many "line" infantry units that can not be done with figures currently produced or soon to be (Front Rank and Emperialist Enterprises). I base this upon the chaotic nature of campaigning and logistics. This added to the universal ability of troops in the field, throughout history, to modify their equipment and uniforms. I do believe that we can stand for a better mix of cavalry figures of all types. I agree that there are many figures that can and most likely should be done based upon specific uniforms of specific units. I do know that Emperialist Enterprises is releasing WSS Spanish this summer. The owner Bob will not be at Historicon this year, unfortunately, but for those of you who are interested I can relay his snail mail and phone number (Bob is not comfortable with his computer and most likely still does not have email).

Now that I've stepped into it with this post I have started to have unique uniforms pop into my mind that all GOOD period gamers must have that are not available at this time in addition to the ones already posted. So ignore the madman and let us see those unique infantry units!

I personally would like to see a musketeer in a waist coat so I can paint up Tifton's regiment in Ireland and to give a more campaign look to other units. The perfect mix would be several hat styles to match the 1689/90 sytles. I own a bunch of the Foundry SYW figures in waist coat that I was going to use but they are a little too "SYW ish".

The most important thing is that we all support the manufacturers who are investing time and money into the period. This is especially true for anyone who decides to produce the more specialized figures as their investment will be harder to make up.

I am thrilled that there are people who are willing to make the investment in this period so we gamers can continue to collect and build our favorite period of history.

All the best,
Bill

[barr7430]

I agree with all of Bill's points!

For a manufacturer coming into a new period(for them) but an existing period(for the market) I think the most commercially sound position to put yourself in is that of the PUNTER not that of the MANUFACTURER.

Certain facts will become self evident:

1. Many(most) of your target market will already have started collecting figures in the period.
2. To be tempted to buy from a new range, that range will probably have to be
- Compatible in size with existing collection
- Different and appealing enough to motivate the PUNTER to switch
from current MANUFACTURER or
- Compatible enough and complimentary to, existing ranges to enable
MIXED MANUFACTURER UNITS to be assembled
- Filling GAPS in existing available ranges
- Offering something totally unique.

Many gamers are not unduly worried about figures coming from different ranges/manufacturers in a single collection. Others are very fussy about it!
It is a tough one to read or call.

Figure choice is also particularly idiosyncratic. It could be argued that Dixons GA range is anatomically the most inaccurate and cartoon-ey. I personally find them the most appealing of all the available ranges. With the exceptions of the officers and cavalry I find the incredibly well sculpted Front Rank figures the least appealing! There is no accounting for taste!!

On subject matter I will resist the temptation to provide a wish list as it is unlikely that I will make any future HUGE investment in this period having currently over 1,000 figures but I would offer some comments:


FORGET TRICORNES! - make the headgear floppy and turned up in irregular shapes - I would suggest going more for the ACW look particularly the variety of informal methods favoured in the field. There are more similarities than differences between 1670-1720 headgear and America 1850-1880!.

MORE INFORMALITY IN POSE AND DRESS: Waistcoats instead of coats, open waistcoats, shirts, bareheads, crossbelts over shirts or waistcoats. Socks which are rolled down. Ragged clothes, barefeet? (and not just for some poor Irish Jacobite who didn't have any in the first place). I'm sure a Guardsman of the Gard te Voet at Neerwinden was just as likely to be an unshaven, unwashed, poorly shod and raggedly clothed individual.

HORSES: Carrying fodder bags, fascines, slung gear.

CASUALTY FIGURES with open hands, falling, kneeling etc. One of the most versatile figures in the Foundry range is the shot figure falling back - Pikeman, Standard bearer, musketeer, artilleryman....etc

MUSKETEERS FIRING FROM THE HIP which I believe was an accepted position to fire from.

OK, I'll stop now

B

[Anonymous]

Barry, Bill, Lindsay, Everyone

I also agree with the points so far as regards addiitonal figures. I'm sure I'm like many gamers who have over the years got started on this period and would happily re-start collecting under the impetus of a new range of figures to fill in the gaps in the existing ranges. I agree that complementing the existing Nine Years War ranges is the way to go, and, to my mind if at all possible, in 25mm scale to be compatible in size with Dixons, Foundry, Perry Miniatures, Essex etc. So what would I like to see? Well, like everyone I have a wish list, but luckily mine looks to be pretty close to everyone else's it seems! Here's my thoughts:

- figures in campaign dress I think are really attractive, especially when designed in a marching style or at ease. My battalions don't look much like the soldiers in the (admittedly earlier) paintings of Snayers, Huchtenberg, Van Wyck and Wouvermans, but I'd certainly like some of them to do so. I'm sure there'd be quite a bit of interest in figures weighed down with snapsacks, blankets, pots, tent poles and even looted supplies (squealing piglet, anyone? ).

- the addition of figures patches to clothing and typical field signs (such as clutches of oak leaves or bunches of straw) would be excellent. That would give Barry plenty of fun designing a ULB Event Card in which a unit is attacked by its "allies" wearing the wrong field sign. And yes, a couple of barefooted "Flanderkin" would not be out of place!

- informal tricorns please, or, if not, then formal tricorns with one of the turned up sides to the front. Many of the paintings and illustrations of the period show hats with a turned up brim, and I think at least one period author identified the turned up brim of a hat as the mark of a soldier!

- as for specialist figures which seem to be missing from the ranges at present, how about the following: fifers for German regiments: regimental chaplains, priests or ministers: grenadier officers, drummers and standard bearers in a variety of early grenadier caps (cloth, metal and furred): early horse grenadiers for Alliance armies: marching pikemen: mounted and dismounted dragoons carrying fascines: musketeers without bayonets wielding their muskets as clubs.

Hope this gives you some more ideas!

Adam

[Anonymous]

A lot of rules sets have "army lists" which seem kind of silly to experienced gamers in the period, but I can see that army lists might be a good idea for newbies (like me ) who know very little about the period. I'd like to see the army list taken a step further to include a list of typical units that one should include in one's Dutch, French or British army, for example, and then make a suggestion as to which brand of figures are recommended for that particular unit.

With regard to the incentives that a manufacturer might need to produce figure gaps, I have two words: BULK PURCHASES . Bill Amick cited the example of musketeers in waistcoats. Suppose a small group of people pooled their resources and needs and told some figure manufacturer that they would place an order for say 500 musketeers in waistcoats, that might get their attention and yield the desired figure. Some of my colleagues and I have done this in other periods with admittedly mixed results. Figure sculptors are artists and you really can't make an artist do something that he has no interest in. However, some sculptors will respond and produce the figure if they receive a large enough order. I would think that a group like this one probably has enough heavy hitters to pull this caper off.

[Anonymous]

Alte Fritz said and I qoute

With regard to the incentives that a manufacturer might need to produce figure gaps, I have two words: BULK PURCHASES . Bill Amick cited the example of musketeers in waistcoats. Suppose a small group of people pooled their resources and needs and told some figure manufacturer that they would place an order for say 500 musketeers in waistcoats, that might get their attention and yield the desired figure. Some of my colleagues and I have done this in other periods with admittedly mixed results. Figure sculptors are artists and you really can't make an artist do something that he has no interest in. However, some sculptors will respond and produce the figure if they receive a large enough order. I would think that a group like this one probably has enough heavy hitters to pull this caper off. End qoute

One of the people that I and the others will be speaking too at Historicon Is Nic Robson of Eureka.http://www.eurekamin.com.au/
I have already had positive feed back from Nic privatley. As you may or may not know Eureka has the Hundred club that is to sculpt and cast figures in 25mm-28mm scale. A few yearsa ago I was working on a Historical Macbeth army but could not find Islemen at that time in the scale I wanted. Luckily a friend also wanted the same figures, We contacted Nic and got well dressed Islemen(mail) and lesser dressed islemen cast. ( Four varations of each I might add)These were then added to Eureka list of figures for sale. I benefitted personnely by the the arrangement by getting the figures I could not find and the wargames public in general benefitted by having figures available that maybe no one had thought of casting otherwise. Now its a case of the minimum amount needed to cast a figure is 150 which is not to shabby. This would be four variants per figure barring personality figures that is. I do not not know who all has an interest in seeing new figures compatible with figures on the market already Dixons, Foundry, Perry Miniatures, Essex, Old Glory and Imerialist MINIs. I know many of the members have collections that at are large and also have a lot of time invested in them but I am sure knowing avid wargamers worldwide so to speak you never seem to have enough lead.My idea when I first posted
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:35 am Post subject: What kind and types of figures are most required.
in the general discussion section was to see if there was such an interest not as a manufacturer but as a wargamer like yourselves who never seems to have enough toys.New figures in this period plus Barry's work on ULB
( for which many of us are extremley grateful ) may spark a greater Interest in the period 1675-1725. There are many and interesting conflicts throughout this time period that may get a better following the more figures and information is out there. As I said in my original post I will report on any outcome at Historicon as I intend to talk to other manufactures and figure sculptors when I am there. I have to be there all four days but there again so do they so I will try to speak to as many as possible in that time period. I intend to meet some of the members on this forum at historicon too so I will have input other than my own to put before the Manufacturers etc. Many people have e-mailed me off list also who cannot attend due to distance and or prior engagements and I will also lobby on there behalf. There are now including myself 108 people on this forum and some are none vocal as regards what they want to as regards figures etc. Put another way if we only all bought 2 of one figure thats 216 figures enough to get one figure type in four variants. So its a case of how many different figures do you want if we go with Eureka for instance if we had ten different foot figures of four variants the memebrs would only have to purchase two of each figure for total of 20 new figures to add to your collections. If however your like me you'll want at least one of each variant for only a total of 40 figures I would have to purchase If you are new to the period and have not started building your forces well Please feel free to contact me off list at scotia123135@msn.com Regards Lindsay

[barr7430]

There might be a lot more opportunity in this than at first it seems...
.

1. An underdeveloped/underexploited Wargaming period which is extremely interesting and game-able. Great variety, loadsa colour, amazingly facinating and charismatic characters, big and small battles, sieges, multi theatre....

2. A vocal core of gamers (I would assume) supported by a much larger silent majority - The Wedge or Cash pool - this being the baited hook for any designer/manufacturer.

3. Good strong links into the trade and hobby press. Duncan Mac is always interested in new developments/figures/good games/articles and I and others have very cordial relations with him. I also have had dealings with guys like Neil Fawcett at Wargames Journal and others.

4. A set of non commmercial home grown rules(ULB) that seem at least to be encouraging gaming and stimulating interest in the period.

5. Convention connections and the option to bring packages together ie..
UK or US Convention game featuring: Period/New figure range/rule set/knowledgable people, what does that equal????? = LARGER SCALE COMMERCIAL OPPORTUNITY, particularly for the figure sales. Increased exposure for the period, MORE FIGURES SALES!

Let's face it, if Foundry and the very talented Mark Copplestone can spin Darkest Africa out to the extent they did AND convince people that it actually was worth wargaming(Which I think was a stunt of Barnum proportions ) then surely the Cockpit of Europe in one of history's most popular periods with characters like Billy, Louie, Johnny C, Gene S(That's EuGENE of SAVOY not Gene Simmons for all you Kiss fans out there!!!!!), Bonnie Bluddy Claverhouse et al could raise a little interest!!!!
These guys were made for Hello Magazine and the tabloid press!

Hell, they've just been refighting the Boyne(again)..315th annual refight convention this week here in the UK.. full coverage on BBC Evening News. Alas, that is the WRONG type of public interest

B

[Spiraluk]

Hi All

Again more great advice, which I will take note of. I agree with Barry about the ablility to make this period much more popular. I among other were impressed with what good marketing did for the darkest Africa range. I picked up alot of tips from that!

I don't want to just produce penny packet figure types to fill gaps in the market. This is not much help to someone coming into the period, who wants his figures from the same company. Like you said, people are fussy. I want to make a comprehensive range of figures that will cater for new and existing gamers.

As it seems to be a running theme with you lot, I will make troops in waistcoats amoung the first batch of figs to be released. Can anyone give me details? I have a picture from the Osprey "The British Army 1660-1704" which shows a soldier with a sleeved waistcoat. Is this about right, or were there sleeveless waistcoats also?

[Spiraluk]

Oh and another thing. Pockets! Where the heck do I start with that little minefield!

[barr7430]

Bill,

waistcoats were often the cut down coats from previous years. I think sleeved or sleeveless could be acceptable. I would think that a coat which had been on campaign for any length of time in a period when financing of uniforms was an expense attributable not to the Government but to the regimental colonel would have left you a high degree of license with regard to what these guys were wearing. Very many colonels were cashiered for fraud and worse!!!! A look in the magnificent Succession of Colonels of the British Army (Leslie) is a real eye opener!

As to pockets... I think you are right it is a minefield but a look in the Osprey book is as good a start as any. Usually not laced/lined for other ranks. For officers anything goes!

cheers

B