*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 08:37:02 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Donate

We Appreciate Your Support

Recent

Author Topic: Empress or TAG or Perry?  (Read 6671 times)

Offline Parrot

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 102
Empress or TAG or Perry?
« on: July 15, 2018, 09:18:16 AM »
Which range would give the best thirty years war army?  The Assault Group has a dedicated range just for the TYW, but Empress miniatures are very attractive, and although sold as ECW, they don't seem to far off?  And of course there is also Perry, in much the same position as Empress it would seem.  I was leaning toward TAG, with the specific range for TYW, but the other 2 ranges feature musketeers without rests, which might be better for later parts of the war?  Or would rests still be used in 1648 Europe?  I'm looking for a good range for either protestant or catholic Germans for the war.

Offline Firescale Whack

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 297
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #1 on: July 15, 2018, 10:15:44 AM »
https://www.horcata.eu/ for the best TYW range I would go with Bohemian miniatures. Cav is sold without horses, I use Eureka Miniatures mounts for mine but they are made for Front Rank I believe.

Offline Stecal

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 308
    • Pictures of my minis
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #2 on: July 15, 2018, 12:38:48 PM »
I mix them all - Perry, TAG, Horcata, even some Old Glory and Warlord Games are of a similar size.  Can't comment on the Empress Minis as I don't have any.

With some carving you can fit the Horcata cavalry onto Warlord Minis plastic horses.
Clear the battlefield and let me see
All the profit from our victory.

Offline Phillius

  • Bookworm
  • Posts: 73
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2018, 08:32:25 PM »
Horcata is probably the most suitable for early to mid war. But TAG are probably the most complete. Avanpost Miniatures are probably the nicest figures available for the TYW though.

There's also El Kraken Released for the Spanish in the TYW, lovely figures, tough to assemble for us old fellas.

Steve Barber announced a new range last week as well.

1st Corps also have a range.

Mine consists of El Kraken for the Spanish, Warlord for their German cohorts at Nordlingen, but also Horcata (Bohemian Miniatures) and Avanpost as I build up numbers.

Offline Parrot

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 102
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #4 on: July 15, 2018, 10:33:21 PM »
So what would be the best range for late war figures? 

Offline Phillius

  • Bookworm
  • Posts: 73
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #5 on: July 16, 2018, 07:35:10 PM »
Personally I would go with Avanpost although their range is only just developing.

I'm not sure how it affected dress at the time, but the TYW is the start of what modern climate scientists have termed "the little ice age". In Peter Wilsons book on the TYW he points out how it was colder on the continent than it was in Britain at this time; due to Britains maritime climate. And that to me, indicates slightly fuller clothing in Europe than in Britain (e.g. longer coats). However, I could be completely wrong on that one.

I also believe there are differences in head wear between Britain and the continent at that time. Helmets and casual wear.

Offline CaptainBigglesmay

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 49
  • Aucto Splendore Resurgo
    • My Photo bucket
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2018, 04:38:11 PM »
TAG a clear first. Bicorne and Renegade a second. Perry/foundry both beautiful ranges but 25mm and too small to fit in with TAG, so use them as command or odd figures. I tend to use them as younger men in my ECW garrison regiments.

Can't personally deal with empress, look too wooden in poses and the range in general does nothing for me.

Offline Sparrow

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1302
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2018, 06:42:05 PM »
Hi Parrot

Have followed this thread with great interest. If you are wanting to game the TYW my advice would be go with a TYW range like Assault Group. The Empress range is wonderful (in my opinion, although I am a little biased 😉) but it is very much an ECW range (there were quite a few differences between European and English/Welsh fashions at the time). It depends how “purist” you want to be I suppose but the fact you’ve asked this suggests you are wanting to take this pretty seriously (which I thoroughly applaud).

The Renegade and Bicorne ranges are, in my opinion , neither TYW nor (based on the latest research) ECW but rather “generic C17th”. Personally, I don’t go for their chunky style but each to their own (as I’ve said before on this forum, it would be really boring if we were all the same! Where some see problems others see beauty!).

The Perry range was great when it came out but suffers a bit from being left alone for too long. Size wise it presents some challenges if mixing with other ranges but there are some lovely figures in there.

Hope this has all helped! Good luck with the project!
« Last Edit: July 17, 2018, 06:54:55 PM by Sparrow »
Put your trust in God and keep your powder dry!

Offline Sparrow

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1302
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2018, 06:52:05 PM »
Should have said - musket rests! Still being issued in England in 1644 though very much at the whim of the individual Colonel (or those paying to equip the Regiment!). They are issued to help provide a steady aim (ie to prevent you firing too high or low) so are particularly useful with less experienced troops. No idea re use in the TYW but European  artwork of the 1630’s suggests some troops at least were still using them then? (Of course it may also be artistic licence by the artist!). Hope this helps...

Offline Metternich

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2559
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #9 on: July 19, 2018, 02:42:41 PM »
To add to Sparrow's comments, the Empress ECW range cavalry are very much English and wouldn't be found on the Continent (i.e. not really TYW).  The armored cavalry (what in the 17th century would be called Harquebusiers, to distinguish them from the still heavier Cuirassier in 3/4 armor) have the "three-barred pot" helmet which was an English fashion -  the continental fashion was for the single nasal.   

Offline TAX

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 39
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2018, 07:27:13 PM »
My 1630ish pike & shotte army is built around Warlord games plastics as fillers mixed up with their veteran packs which feels very TYW with their worn clothes and those ”I don’t know What their name in english”  cloaks.
Also their ”command group nr.4” looks very TYW, lovely sculpts also.
I have also miniatures from perry, bicorne and redoubt but all of them looks to ECW imao.
//TAX
« Last Edit: July 19, 2018, 07:30:21 PM by TAX »

Offline TAX

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 39
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2018, 07:32:56 PM »
Those Avantpost miniatures looks lovely though.

Offline Parrot

  • Librarian
  • Posts: 102
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #12 on: July 24, 2018, 09:01:49 AM »
Regarding the TAG Thirty Years War Germans, I see a number of cavalry called "Carabins".  Are these mounted Dragoons?  Are they what is referred to elsewhere as Harquebusier?  How are they different from "Reiters"?

Offline pete

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 45
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #13 on: July 24, 2018, 02:26:32 PM »
not mounted dragoons, small companies of firearm horse, in loose order, sometimes attached to Horse formations as flank guards, aor to 'fire in' a general charge... Reiter, differ in Order, armour & equipment, mostly having pistols, not hagbut/harquebus/carbine as the TAG Carabins have.

Offline Stavka

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 38
Re: Empress or TAG or Perry?
« Reply #14 on: July 27, 2018, 11:52:32 PM »
My "Spanish" army (in reality a core of Spanish tercios with a goodly number of allied units from the Low Countries, Italy, Germany and even one of Irish) consists of a mix of figures.  I mainly use Bicorne, Renegade, Horcata and Warlord (but not their plastics- there's something about them that looks odd to me). 

There are some height differences, but I can live with it so long as I don't place the tallest next to the shortest on the bases.  Anyway when looking down on a unit on the tabletop, as opposed to comparing two figures held at eye level, I find it's seldom noticeable, especially given a unifying paint scheme.

You asked about late-TYW miniature ranges- there aren't any, although many companies do continental mercenaries for the ECW which can work. For late-TYW foot, many ECW figures can (and have to, given the lack of a dedicated range) pass muster.  Although with some caveats, depending on how much a stickler for accuracy you are.

What follows is relevant for the later, "French" phase of the TYW, which is where my own interest lies (particularly from Honnecourt, 1642 to Lens, 1648). Note that the armies of Gustavus Adolphus, Wallenstein and Tilly would have markedly different clothing styles; if it’s that time period you want to do, you’re best off with more appropriate miniatures from First Corps, TAG, or Emil Horky’s excellent range. 

I'm no expert; but from what I have been able to find out, it seems that European military fashion saw a higher percentage of floppy hats in a regiment than you would likely find in the British Isles, and with generally wider brims and taller crowns. 



The following two images are from Snayers' painting of the Battle of Honnecourt, and was likely painted not too many years after the battle was fought.



Note the chap with the eastern-style fur-lined cap. Not nearly as common as the wide-brimmed hat, but going by the art these seem to have been found in all continental armies, increasingly so the further east the army.



http://www.museumsyndicate.com/item.php?item=47416

What you don’t want are a lot of knitted Monmouth caps and monteroes (I go with maybe one or two in about 30 at most, and would only include them in armies such as the Spanish and Dutch. Nowhere east of the Rhine).

Unless you are doing the French, who could sometimes be seen wearing a similar hat to the montero, but with more plumage, called a boukinhan (spelling seems to vary). Redoubt does a nice one- on those rare occasions it has been properly cast.

In general though, French TYW armies had a distinctive appearance with all their ribbons and frippery, and unfortunately are very poorly served by figure manufacturers.

When I decided to do a late TYW Spanish and allied army, I already had a lot of Bicorne/ Renegade ECW figures in monteroes and knitted caps.  Waste not, want not, so I ended up replacing all the caps with floppy hats; some using spare heads from Redoubt and Bicorne, but most I made myself from epoxy putty. 

While I had the putty out I gave a number of them various tatty capes and cloaks, which besides from hiding a multitude of sins and conversion work, seem to have been quite common going from the contemporary art.  With practice it was easier than it sounds, and fun to do.






But if starting out it would be a lot easier just to get miniatures in floppy hats from the get-go.

As a general rule for the TYW German/ Imperialist armies, it’s a good idea to use as many figures wearing cassocks as you can get your hands on, as they often appear in period paintings. The Warlord veteran musketeers in ragged clothing and cassocks are ideal for this, although I discarded the flatter hats and replaced them with ones that had taller crowns.




From about the mid-1640’s onwards, breeches were becoming more tubular than was the case earlier, and cravattes were beginning to replace the earlier falling neck collars. There are a few miniatures out there wearing these, but there's not much that can be done to fix this. However, it was a trend coming in very late in the wars, and fortunately for me the Spanish tended to dress more conservatively than the ever-fashion-conscious French, anyway.

In general, body armour was being lightened; but from paintings it seems that more was worn on the continent than in the ECW.  How much of this may have been due to artistic licence or convention, I have no idea.

Cavalry is a whole different matter; the 3/4 armed cuirassier was less common than earlier, being steadily replaced with harquebusier-style equipment, buffcoat and corselet. 




I don’t know of any company who makes the lightened style of cuirassier armour typically worn on the continent during the 1640’s as seen above, and it’s not an easy thing to convert.

As has been previously mentioned, the three-barred pot must have been extremely rare, if it was seen at all, outside the British Isles. Never say never, but for the TYW I certainly haven't come across any representations of it in period art.

For those few remaining regiments of 3/4 armoured cuirassiers, I will be replacing most of the fully enclosed helmets with heads in floppy hats.

Bicorne do cavalry wearing “Dutch” coats and cassocks, which are very good for representing the common-and-garden, more lightly-equipped unarmoured horse from about the mid-1640’s. The helmets are fine, being in the continental style, as are the wide-brimmed hats (which, worn over an iron skull cap, would have predominated as the years went on). 




But again the monteroes have to go; I clipped mine off and again replaced them with a large floppy hat from epoxy putty.

Sorry for the lengthy post, it's a pet subject of mine!
« Last Edit: July 29, 2018, 04:24:21 AM by Stavka »