|
|
Post by felixs on Sept 12, 2019 22:14:17 GMT
Museum Miniatures is a mixed bunch really scale-wise. The Assyrians are on the smaller end of the Museum range (not "Museum monsters") and I actually did a rough comparison before I got to work and thought I was fine. Turns out I am not and now I cannot unsee the 2mm or so in height difference. Maybe it is because - ironically - the light troops that have now got the big and bulky minis. Somehow it looks worse painted than it did in the unpainted metal.
Well.. I have too many armies anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Sept 12, 2019 15:16:21 GMT
I think I will just store them away and probably never look at them again.
No spare figures that would make any difference. No intention of doing the job all over again and painting another 20 figures or so.
My joy is spoiled.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Sept 12, 2019 9:07:58 GMT
I had an Assyrian army built out of Magister Militum minis. Now I have updated them to DBA 3, using Museum Miniatures, which looked reasonable sized. I should have compared more meticulously before I painted them up. Only after basing I realized that I do now have a complete and painted Neo Assyrian Later Sargonid army (lacks a single element of Ps for all options) the slight disproportion in figure sizes I cannot unsee anymore. My joy is spoilt, I do not want that army anymore. I fear I will not even finish the basing.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Sept 3, 2019 20:57:09 GMT
I like a variety of paints, since every maker seems to have a few colours they do particularly well.
I use a lot of Vallejo, Miniature Paints (if I can get them), some old Games Workshop paints (no idea how the new ones are), and a lot of Lukas paints. In the past, I have also used Plaka, textile paints, Revell enamels, various brands of artist paints. Most of those worked OK and I have no problems with the figures I painted with them years ago.
Mostly Vallejo, because they are good, the range is vast and reliable, and because the local store stocks them. And Lukas, because the local arts store stocks them.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Sept 3, 2019 20:39:12 GMT
My Assyrians are finally finished.
The painting, that is.
Now comes the basing part...
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Aug 31, 2019 22:05:50 GMT
Ruhrgebiet here.
If anyone ever is near Bochum, feel free to contact me - maybe we can meet for a game (or just banter).
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on May 5, 2019 16:07:39 GMT
When I say fine sandpaper it was REALLY FINE.
From a health point of view, the finer the dust the bigger the potential problem. |
|
|
|
Post by felixs on May 4, 2019 11:49:36 GMT
You need a very fine sandpaper to very gently rub down the resin.
I am not sure this is true, but I seem to remember that resin dust is quite hazardous, possibly carcinogenic.
Primitive dust protection might not even be sufficient to avoid these effects.
Please research this before filing or sanding resin.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Feb 28, 2019 12:16:45 GMT
No, I think they would look about the same.
I would go with different main colours, to differentiate the armies on the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Feb 26, 2019 21:41:50 GMT
Thank you.
I will buy the rules and try them out!
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Feb 24, 2019 11:48:56 GMT
Thank you very much for the feedback!
Sounds like the game should work very well for HotT-style battles set in a Warhammer-esque world, which is what I am after. Not so interested in the historical variants.
Just two more questions before I buy:
- Is there a points-buy system to cost balance everything in the rules?
- Do HotT/DBA size armies based for these systems work well, or do I need to build new armies?
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Feb 12, 2019 15:27:24 GMT
Hello,
this topic is a bit older, but fantasy gaming really is on and off for me, as the search for a good rules set beyond HotT (which is fine, but a bit peculiar) is so frustrating.
So, while we are on that topic: Could you tell us a bit more on the Olde World expansion? I am a bit baffled by the notion that it is both 100YW and Warhammer - yould you explain that bit?
Especially:
Are flyers handled in the rules?
What size are armies?
What other books are needed for play?
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Jan 24, 2019 13:30:30 GMT
Dear all,
I would like to concentrate on 15mm gaming, so I am considering selling my 28mm stuff. Shipping in Europe is OK, USA would probably be too expensive.
I have the following 24 point HotT armies: - Dwarves - Orcs - Goblins - Undead (lots of Hordes, quite spectacular) - Good Knights - Technomancer (steampunkish, mostly built from Mageknigth figures)
I also have a lot of Uncharted Seas stuff - huge fleets for most factions, much of it painted. Includes rules, perfectly playable as is. Would like to sell as a lot.
Also big lots of dwarves and undead for Kings of War (by Mantic Games).
Is there any interest in that?
And does anyone have ideas for realistic pricing?
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Jan 14, 2019 11:19:38 GMT
New historical evidence or modern interpretations of ancient/medieval armies. Again, given the extreme attention to detail Phil and the gang put into earlier versions and the relatively slow change in this domain vs the relatively short time between 2.2 and 3.0! I would guess that this to is fairly minor. So all in all the extent of Army list revision between the two versions seems disproportionate to the reasons for change. Am I missing something?
Totally agree that there is not that much new research. Also, most of what there is does not translate into anything that wargamers are interested in. Pre-modern army lists are mostly guess-work anyway, especially in a rather abstract game such as DBA, where there are no exact numbers for troop strength in a given unit etc.
I assume that the reason for the change in the army lists is: a) The transition from DBM to DBMM and the list changes done in that process for those games. b) More enjoyable ("fun") army lists. DBA 3 lists are much more colourful. c) Balance (between historical opponents) - reducing the Kn//Bd options seems obvious. Making Light Horse better was another one apparently (I remember someone quoting Phil on that).
While I agree that fixed army lists are needed for tournaments, I am not interested in tournaments myself anyway. For friendly play (which is the only kind of play I like), army lists should be treated with some flexibility. For most armies, we have no exact idea of their composition anyway. And even if we have that, it would differ for given battles. For fictional battles (which is what 90% or more of DBA games is about), army composition does not matter.
So, please do not stress yourself about getting your armies DBA 3 legal. If you want to play in a tournament with a DBA 3 list, it should be possible to find a loaner army. The important part is that you keep enjoying the game and keep enjoying what you already have.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Nov 10, 2018 13:23:47 GMT
Assyrians. Still..
And building a new board.
|
|
