New Romans from Wargames Factory

[Howard Whitehouse]

I painted some of the new Wargames Factory plastic Romans last week. Here's a sample:



Gaius and Marcus have a chat. I hate to blow up figures much beyond actual size, because all the errors show up! 



Comparison shot with Warlord Games (nice but small) and Foundry's Copplestone-sculpted line.

[commissarmoody]

I like 

[Calimero]

They do look good. I wonder why Warlord Games make their Romans so small? Anyhow, the Romans from Wargames Factory look great, better that we could expect from the sprue pictures on their site. 

[Gluteus Maximus]

I like these better than the Warlord Games version.

Now all I need are the "lorica segmentata" versions and my son can have his Roman Army 

He's only 9, so just wants the version he's seen being worn by the Watling Street Guard.

I, on the other hand, have always wanted to do a Civil War game........ 

[Svennn]

I saw a sample box of the Wargames Factory plastics yesterday and I must say that the detail, particularly on the command sprue, was very very soft. Probably the poorest plastic figures I have seen since I was knee high and had some of those "made in Hong Kong" Airfix wannabes. Great shame as they could have been great. The Zulu Brits were a little better but I would still give them a miss myself.

Howard, yours look pretty good so perhaps they were poor examples but they had been shipped direct from WF as samples.

[Howard Whitehouse]

You know, I thought the same thing when I saw the sprues. The plastic on the Roman seti s quite shiny, which creates a 'blurry' effect, especially on one of the four sprues.

I was initially a bit disappointed in them. After all, I work for Wargames Factory, so I want the quality to be top-notch. But then I assembled them and spray-primed them black, and they looked a lot better all round. I dry-brushed the mail, and a lot of detail became much clearer. I would say that some of the detail is not as crisp as I'd like - the straps around the shoulder pieces benefitted from a black outline to make them stand out, and the sandals are a bit mushy - but the results are as you see them.

Here's a centurion (slightly hidden by his shield) with a Copplestone (Foundry) tribune.



It's not a case of 'ah, a great painter can do wonders' because - as you'll note - I'm really a pretty average painter.

I've seen pre-productions bits of Celtic chariots and Zulus, and there's no softness of detail on them - they just plain look excellent.

[Svennn]

"I would not believe anything a frother says about these figures"

I take it that is meant as a dig at me.

This is not Frothers and I am not going to instigate or enter into any debate. Suffice it to say I offered my honest opinion of what I saw.

I would like to thank Howard for the honesty of his later post and leave it at that.

[white knight]

I would not believe anything a frother says about these figures. They have been bad mouthing them before they were even made.

Now that's a bit uncalled for.

The main reason they were getting flak at frothers is that they (Wargames Factory) were always making up excuses not to have to show pictures of the finished physical models (only 3d renderings) instead of just coming out and admitting they didn't have them and had a delay in their schedule (as they eventually had to do). Well, that and the fact that some people just hate plastic whoever makes it.

Regardless, if I was into Romans, I'd probably get a box, just to play around a bit with them or use as conversion fodder.

[white knight]

oh... right. 

[white knight]

I don't think so.

While it's true Kev or Bob don't seem to be able to do much wrong there, it's an overgeneralisation to say only there stuff gets good reviews. Loads of other stuff that doesn't get trashed either.

Regardless, I don't come here to debate or defend frothers. I don't think these plastics are as good as they could be, but like I said, I'd still get a box if I was into the subject. That'll have to do.

[Ray Rivers]

I would not believe anything a frother says about these figures.

Agreed, this isn't Frothers, mate. 

Personally, if I was going to do plastic I would go for the Warlord mini's because I agree that the Wargames Factory figures not only lack sufficient detail but more importantly, the Wargames Factory figures just don't look anatomically correct.  They seem to have stubby legs.

However, if I really wanted to do Romans, I would buy Foundry.  I have a huge batch of their Republic Romans and they are superb.

[Captain Blood]

Personally, having now taken a look at both the Warlord and Wargames Factory Romans, I can't honestly say I'm impressed with either of them. They both lack the crispness of detail you get on metal figures, and which the Perrys appear to have managed to achieve on their plastic ACW and French Napoleonics.

And the Victrix British Napoleonics look in a class apart - although we have yet to see them in the flesh of course...

Will be interesting to see in the long run who gets this plastic thing right, and who doesn't quite hit the mark...

[Pulper]

"Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ankles."

Best statement I´ve read about these figs and it comes from TMP.

[Condottiere]

I'll wait for the Celts, and considering the WF Romans are bigger than the WG ones, the WF might be giants, going by the computer generated images.

[revford]

I think the Warlord Romans are smaller as they are scaled to fit nicely with the older Foundry Romans.