Conquest Games Medieval Archers (28mm, plastic) Frame shots added P4

[grant]

And they still have that insane 'mouse-over-popup' in their webstore. *sigh*

That's all the rage on websites now. I hate it so much. Just let me zoom in with my iPhone! I CAN DO IT!

[Captain Blood]

As requested, shots of the frames...

Things to note. The box contains 4 frames x 6 archer figures, plus two 'accessory frames' (which are in fact, just the bottom half of the standard frame - the half with all the bow arms), plus one command frame - which is the same as the command frame in the Norman infantry box.

My first impressions are that these are quite a lot like the Fireforge, Gripping Beast and Frostgrave plastics - i.e. soft detail on the clothing and bodies, well done faces. The hands on these are slightly unnatural looking, giving them that slightly Games Workshop-like look that a lot of plastic figures seem to unavoidably have (Perry and Victrix excepted).

The legs all look a bit suspiciously stiff and spindly to me, and unlike all the other plastic figure sets out there, the Conquest figures have shoulders and upper arms moulded onto the body, with only lower arms separate. I don't know why they decided to do it like this, because it not only reduces one's ability to pose the figure how you want it to some extent, but it also cuts down the ease with which you can kitbash them with other sets without resorting to surgery of some sort
Not insurmountable, but irritating.

There are some separate knives (which look suspiciously like Bowie knives rather than C11th daggers) and quivers of arrows included, and these are nicely done.

The casting is pretty clean with only faint mould lines and one or two tiny bobbles of spare plastic attached to sword tips etc.

The detail disappears a bit in some places though. The faces, for instance, are very nicely done (although a shame they included a couple of duplicates). The back of the hair is very soft on detail though. Weirdly, on some of the heads though, at the sides of the head (where the back of the hair joins the front of the face), it kind of bleeds into no real detail at all. Just a semi-featureless area of plastic. Which is poor frankly.

Here are the frames:









This is the 'accessory frame' (as you see, it's just the bottom half of the main frame)



And the command frame...



Now despite my criticisms, my sense is that the bodies will take paint extremely well. So I'll probably just put a few figures together straight from the box, possibly with a little bit of added Green Stuff fur, and maybe some trousers on a couple of them, and they'll serve decently enough for Stark or early Saxon bowmen respectively.

Jimbibbly and I split a box, so for nine quid for 15 odd figures and lots of spare parts, I really can't complain. It's probably worth it for the heads alone, which will appear on many a future mash-up of all denominations. The knives and quivers will certainly come in useful, as will some of the bow arms wearing braces, and even some of the pointing hands etc.

It's really just the legs which look a bit suspect. Maybe I'll just stand mine in long grass

[Silent Invader]

Thanks -most useful 

[tyrionhalfman]

Thanks for sharing captain Blood, they look very useful, even though they've stuck with the shoulders attached to the bodies and the low neck joint that are unique to this manufacturer.
A shame, as even though different manufacturers have approached neck joins differently, the others all at least attach arms at the shoulder.
I'm guessing the reason for the shoulders being on the body is to stop you being left with a noticeable line down the shoulder, especially with chain mail unless you're fairly skilled with green stuff. It might look good, but it limits your options for easy kitbashing.
Having said that I'll still pick some up as the other available dark age sets lack archers.

[Captain Blood]

Oh dear... 

Just spent half an hour trying out all the possible shooting arm combinations, and I can't achieve a remotely realistic looking shooting pose.
The problem is the arm joint. Because all the upper arms turn inwards slightly toward the torso, it's just not possible to achieve a lifelike longbow shooting pose, whereby the bow arm, the bowman's chest and the loosing arm are 'flat' - i.e. in a line.
On these figures, the bow arm is always going to turn inwards, whilst the restriction of the ball-and-socket style joint just above the elbow, means that it's also impossible to raise the loosing arm up to the height it should be. Whoever designed these made a schoolboy error... A bow is not loosed with the hand in the middle of the chest, but with the hand pulled back and right up by the ear.
The only way I can see of achieving it is to chop off the arms at the shoulders and reposition the upper arms to turn them more outwards and / or upwards.

If you're not too fussy and just want the general representation of bowmen on the tabletop for a wargame, I guess these will be fine.
But if you're at all interested in the modelling aspects, and creating reasonably lifelike poses, I'm afraid these aren't going to do the job.

Disappointing 

Ah well, the heads are good...

[Vermis]

Great review, Captain. Thanks.

Unnatural hands: where the knuckles and the fingertips are all lined up in perfectly parallel rows, implying that all the fingers are the same length and the fist is a neat cube?

Bowie knives: an attempt at seaxes? Seems kinda limiting either way.

Attached shouders: aye! I remember they looked a bit square and hunched on the Conquest Norman cavalry. I think their effect on the bow-pose might be enough to make me pass on these, for now. (Schoolboy errors that'd be nonexistant with even the most cursory bit of research [i.e. a glance at google images] seem too common in corners of this hobby) Pity, because the heads do look good.

[jauntyharrison]

I vaguely recall that shortbows were drawn to the chest rather than to the ear. Do you suppose that could account for the wonky poses?

[Captain Blood]

I vaguely recall that shortbows were drawn to the chest rather than to the ear. Do you suppose that could account for the wonky poses?

Possibly. Some of the bows depicted in the kit look more like short bows, others appear to be longbows.
Honestly, I think it's just poor design and execution. The way the arm joints work and the way the figures have been sculpted, make it impossible to achieve realistic bow firing postures.

Here's a comparison picture. One of the Conquest figures - as good as I can get it - alongside a Frostgrave body with Perry HYW arms and head.

Because of the way most modern plastic figures fit together, it's possible to easily adjust the set of the head and arms to create more or less realistic looking poses. As with the Frostgrave/Perry model. The head can be tilted. The arms orientated from the shoulder joint to achieve a natural pose. But because of the way these Conquest figures fit together, for a firing pose at least, it isn't possible. The head sits up, rather than looking along the arrow, the bow arm turns in towards the body, and the loosing arm/hand is way too low - sitting above the solar plexus rather than up by the ear/chin.

The Frostgrave figure with the Perry arms and head looks like a passable representation of a man firing a bow.
The Conquest figure looks like a child's drawing of a man firing a bow.
It's not awful - but it's not right.

(By the way, look at the size of the loosing hand. It's approximately twice the size of the hand holding the bow stave!)

Like I say - for me, at any rate - the execution of many aspects of this set is disappointing

Sorry to knock them. It's a much-needed attempt to fill a gap in the market for general purpose plastic early medieval bowmen. And aspects of the set are good. For other poses, it might be fine. But for bow firing poses... They just don't look right. That said, I appreciate I'm a fussy so-and-so. For general wargaming purposes, I'm sure most people won't worry too much about the slightly awkward poses.

[OSHIROmodels]

I think chopping off the arms at the shoulder and then using the Perry Agincourt arms might be the way to go. I'll have a fumble around tonight and see what happens 

cheers

James

[Mason]

I think chopping off the arms at the shoulder and then using the Perry Agincourt arms might be the way to go. I'll have a fumble around tonight and see what happens 

That should work.
A little GS to hide the gap and you are sorted.

[Argonor]

Well, I shall have to pass on this. Too much else to do to bother with getting a somewhat inferior product to look better. Conquest did it again.

[rumacara]

Richard, thanks for putting the frames pictures.

About the bodies and heads indeed they may give some good possiblities for converting.
The arms are a bit more dificult but i believe with some cuts and the help of green stuff they may end up in some interesting aditions.
Nevertheless and despite the negative parts i think they will end up doing their job.
Definetly a lesson for Conquest to learn on the next plastic set.

[Paboook]

Captain Blood, thank you so much for the excellent review! Some features of the set seem to be dissapointing, but for example the faces are great.

[Dr. The Viking]

Wooohooo!

This set had gone totally under my radar. Not to say that it hasn't been missed. When I started my Conquest Normans I wondered why they hadn't made any archers but I guess it's just another one man hobby operation adhering to the same reality as the rest of us.

In the mean time I managed to buy some Black Tree Design archers, but heck - who cares!  

Happy I am.

EDIT:

That webstore is driving me nuts! Every time I scroll over an image it opens in a pop-up window! Is it just me!?

[Argonor]

That webstore is driving me nuts! Every time I scroll over an image it opens in a pop-up window! Is it just me!?

Nope, it's the absolutely worst webstore solution I've ever come across.

And they still have that insane 'mouse-over-popup' in their webstore. *sigh*

That's all the rage on websites now. I hate it so much. Just let me zoom in with my iPhone! I CAN DO IT!