Wargames Factory Orcs, Amazons and Dwarfs

[Erny]

Weapons molded onto hands would be one step, I wouldn't be adverse to arms molded onto torsos either. A choice of legs, torso & arms, weapon hands and head would still allow variety. When they first came out I had a lot of good will for them, the Romans were pants but a first try so we let that slide. They've been going a few years now and still haven't learned...

When I can pick up lead historicals for the same price as these they really need to pick up the quality to compete. I really hope they do but taking the vikings as an example I waited a long time for them to finally be released and they were a big disappointment.

[Argonor]

I actually like the first Roman set. Have it, and have assembled and primed a handful of them for use with Song of Spear and Shield. They are not Foundry quality, true, but they are VERY cheap, and one can actually make more different poses than you would think at first, although the sword arms have limited possibilites.

When judging WF minis, always remember they are meant for massed battles (like Field of Glory), and not for each individual figure to stand out on its own, as we are used to seeing it here - the Shock Troops are more targeted towards skirmish/non-unit games, and has a style and appearance that suits that role.

My first thought when seeing the vikings and saxons was also 'nice fillers for Rohan and other human factions', but the hands still put me off a bit - I think the open hands make them look more like action toys than wargames minis, somehow (if you know what I mean).

My overall feeling about WF is positive. They do some sets that I don't like much, like the colonials, and I hope they'll start changing their approach to hands on melee troops, but all in all it is nice to have a company producing minis at an affordable price, that can then easily be used for kit-bashing if the basic product does not quite fit the bill. Not that I have the time for kit-bashing, atm, but still 

[white knight]

I really like wargames factory stuff. I got a couple of shock troopers and zombies and the level of detail is just as good or better than most and the actual design choices are the best in the bluishness in my opinion.

I have to disagree a little. I have bought both the zombie and the shock troopers set. The shock troopers are decent quality, only a few oddities in the way the greatcoats flow, but nothing serious. Having said that, I hope it is obvious that I'm not a blind WGF hater. The zombies however did not have very crisp details at all and a coat of primer followed by paint makes it worse. The heads seemed particularly bad.

On a lot of their other sets, and these orcs don't appear to be different, the arm-torso connection appears obvious and unrealistic. The open hand option is also a designchoice that simply doesn't look as good as sculpting the hands on the weapons.

They have vastly improved in terms of moulding quality and made some progress in terms of overall design, but there's still some way to go in the designing stage.

To be fair, I also think some of the current GW plastic sets are a step back from earlier sets too, like the empire state troops and handgunners/crossbowmen or the dwarves.

[mweaver]

Yes, the Starship trooper CAP plastics were a pain, and don't come out looking right either, although the metal ones were pretty good.

Didn't care for the GW Empire swordsmen/halberdier handgunners/crosbowmen sets either - but then they turned around and released those excellent plastic greatswords and archers.

I think Wargames Factory is improving.  I hate wrist-to-hand joins with metal figures, but it works pretty well with plastics.  Maybe if we just keep making the point...

[P_Clapham]

I suggested hands and weapons being attached on their forums.  Some of their lines do have torsos with one arm attached, the Celts and the Zombies.  I'd like to see more of that myself, the Warlord games does a good job with that. 

Weapons molded onto hands would be one step, I wouldn't be adverse to arms molded onto torsos either. A choice of legs, torso & arms, weapon hands and head would still allow variety. When they first came out I had a lot of good will for them, the Romans were pants but a first try so we let that slide. They've been going a few years now and still haven't learned...

[Argonor]

the Warlord games does a good job with that. 

Yes, and then they have some issues with stances ('come and embrace me!'). Plastic injection has some limitations, and only when plastics are produced a pure 3D prints somewhen in the future, they will be near-perfect, I think.

I still think the main thing here is to discern between the need for cheap masses of minis that can be trimmed and assembled quickly, and the need for detailed, accurate, characterful single display pieces.

I think we could create a scale ranging between those two extremes, and place manufactures (sometimes products/product series) on it.

WF hit the first extreme well with their Romans, then went a bit away from that with the other ancient/dark age sets, probably because the public demanded more flexibility... and HERE is where they failed to follow their initial strategy, I think, and the result became something that is neither-nor - too many parts, hands and weapons separate, etc. GB's vikings are a far more appealing choice than WF's because they are more focussed on the appearance of the models than on flexibility (and it is stil plastic that can be so easily converted).

Like them or not, the zombies are much more in line with (what I think was) WF's initial stategy (they seem to have some fitting issues, which is a problem in regard to that, but at least they were meant to follow that maxim).

With the Shock Troops, they have taken a whole new direction, and those I'd place about the middle of the scale; they are still cheap enough for making massed armies, while being nice enough for skirmish games, and with a little extra work, display pieces.

From this can be concluded (IMHO):

1: Do not entirely base your design concepts on popular suggestions. Get some experienced designers to have the final call.
2: Make a plan, and stick to it. Some may argue that WF's plan is to meet market demand based on feedback. I don't quite buy it, to me it seems more an excuse for 'We haven't really thought about what we want to do' - with frustration on consumer end as a result. They were lucky to get the rights to produce 'official' FoG minis - IMO they should have PUMPED out sets for that, instead of going in all directions at once. Look at Mantic's way of doing things. Produce a line of minis that supplement each other, and support that, get a hold on a specific market segment, instead of trying to target the entire market all at once.

Pfuihh... back to work, now...

[P_Clapham]

From the WF forums

One of the things Tim has been experimenting with is making a tighter open hand - with the thumb far in as possible. With the orcs - you literally have to push the weapons into the hand - snap them - so you get a better initial tight fit. We'll keep pushing on this because I agree with Sagh that the benefits are just so great with the possible combinations of open hands.

Even so the pictures of the Orcs do have that 'weapon hanging' issue mentioned.  I like the idea of the weapons snapping in.  Will have to wait and see how effective the new design is in person.

[Argonor]

I've seen their release, now, and I'm not impressed with the orc hands.

They're not going to see much business from me if they continue the open hand policy - I don't like that, it looks more like some of the toys I had as a kid than model soldiers for wargaming.

I still may buy some of their zeds, though, as I don't care much about the soft detail on fillers for hordes for games like Dead Walk Again and the likes.

Now, first I have to break out of my moving stupor, painting and gaming wise, then start finishing some pending projects, and THEN I can start planning new purchases as needed...