Fortress Figures Redesigned Site and Rereleased Minis

[Roebeast45]

My friends at Fortress Figures are re-releasing some of their classic minis including the Pirats and Egyptoos. These are funny animal minis sculpted by the brilliant Steve Lortz. They've been removing the integral "slug" bases and replacing them with slotta tabs which makes them much easier to base.

http://www.fortressfigures.com/cgi-bin/fortstore/commerce.cgi





Plus some nice Amazons as well.

[Svennn]

I like the Mummy Duck, hint of WD but I still like it.  You could have posted a link for lazy buggers like myself

[Mainly28s]

Interesting figures, but why slotta? Bloomin' annoying for those of us who don't like gigantic pedestals!

[Roebeast45]

D'oh! Link added.

Tabbed bases make it easier to change bases and use less metal. Originally these were being made in spin-cast plastic so they needed a thick base, which were far thicker than a slot base. But since they're using metal the tabbed bases make more sense for them.

[Sterling Moose]

The Amazons are nice, I don't care for the others.

[snitcythedog]

I miss his 60 skulls and bones for $10.00.  Still have a bunch around.  Nice that you can get them in metal now. 
Snitchy sends.

[mikedemana]

but why slotta? Bloomin' annoying for those of us who don't like gigantic pedestals!

I have to weigh in and agree. I detest slotta basing. I avoid them, and when I can't avoid them, cut them off and glue the figures directly onto the base. Bad GW influence on the market, IMO...

But those ARE nice figs...love the pirate rat!

Mike Demana

[Hatemonger]

I have to weigh in and agree. I detest slotta basing.

Then I feel the need to weigh in as a counterpoint and say I think you're both out of your minds. I think the crappy toy-soldier army-guy blob on the bottom of figures is:
1) ridiculously silly-looking
2) insufficient to use as a standalone base
3) enormously tall if you stick it on another base
4) a pain in the @#$@ to remove if you don't
5) a waste of casting material

Or, in other words, absolutely the worst possible basing solution imaginable. I honestly cannot fathom why on earth you would ever want a giant chunk of excess slag attached to the bottom of your figures. What possible purpose does it serve? Complaints about slottas being "too thick" are nothing new, but if that's so, why would you want the extra height from a cast-on wad, no matter what you use? "I think 3mm slottas are too thick, so I'd rather stick a 2mm mound onto a 2mm plank." That's crazy talk!

I avoid them, and when I can't avoid them, cut them off and glue the figures directly onto the base.

Right. And if you do prefer slottas - or for that matter anything other than an afterthought wad of poorly-textured chewing gum - then welcome to a hell of a lot of work, as opposed to just clipping and filing two minimal contact points under the boot soles.

Now, if it's the actual slotta base that you dislike, then I completely sympathize, because that is down to personal preference for a specific aesthetic. I know a lot of people who like the Warmachine style of base, with rounded-edge, recessed surface, and pronounced lip. I don't; for me, it seems to tweak that same "artificial pedestal" sense that I think sets you off. Personally, I happen to like the clean-beveled-edge look of GW-style bases. True, that may be solely because of "what I grew up with" (i.e. Warhammer), but I contend that your preference is precisely the same. And that is totally ok!

But as far as a practical solution, the "technology" of slotta-bases is absolutely brilliant. If you have some convincing argument for the objective superiority of integral bases, I would dearly love to hear it, because I truly cannot understand how any good comes from it.

- H8

[DeafNala]

Thanks for the post. The Pirats are TERRIFIC minis.

On the "slotta" base...I detest G.W. baby talk. I just clip the tab into two pins for mounting on any base I fancy. The big lump/broccoli style bases involve clipping, grinding, & drilling for the pins...I don't see this as an advantage.

[white knight]

But as far as a practical solution, the "technology" of slotta-bases is absolutely brilliant. If you have some convincing argument for the objective superiority of integral bases, I would dearly love to hear it, because I truly cannot understand how any good comes from it.

I would tend to agree. Rebasing a figure with integral base will potentially suck up half an hour of hobby time, whereas rebasing slottas takes 30 seconds at most.

[FramFramson]

Yeah, it's the rebasing that wins me to slottas. Easy to snip a slot tab off but my god the nonsense (and waste of metal!) on an integral base. 

[jthomlin]

Yeah, it's the rebasing that wins me to slottas. Easy to snip a slot tab off but my god the nonsense (and waste of metal!) on an integral base. 

My collection is split ~50/50 - Integral/Slotta, and I don't like the bulk of slotta bases (~3.4mm tall). I also wanted everything to look the same when based. So I ended up designing and casting my own bases with indents to 'hide' integral bases, rather than having to try and remove them, which on more delicate figures is virtually impossible without significant breakage of ankles etc.

Cheers!
Joe Thomlinson

[FramFramson]

I think the issue with integral bases is they'd be okay if they were of some standard size and shape, because then you could use them for their true intended purpose: As an actual integral base. Then you'd have a very good thin base that usually slopes to the edges. But since most people need clean circles or hexagons, or what-have-you for gaming needs, this necessitates stacking an integral base on top of something else, like a washer or plastic stand, making the integral base a redundant impediment.

Also, I have based slotta figures on very thin bases by using nippers to cut the slot tab in half horizontally.