Here we have mounted (won't be in the 1/32 set) and foot officer, standard bearer, drummer, NCO and eagle guard.
Extra arms for the officers.
Standard and pike for porte-aigle and escort.
Sorry, not enough space for a mounted officer. We can comment on that on another day. The sprue has enough space for 6 figures so we'll probably duplicate the eagle escort as there were two of these guys. Most of the pics I've seen show 2 pistols in one holster, though I've seen some with 2 holsters, will have to look into that.
16 comments:
I admit that a mounted figure is a very welcome extra in larger scales as 1/32 and may be decisive to buy one set. I gladly swap three foot figures from one rider and one horse or accept one mounted officer without the horse and source them somewhere.
I think the figures look great, but I would like to see a bearded sapper carrying an axe in place of a second eagle escort. ESCI made a sapper figure but its rather small and does not fit the image of big guys breaking down doors.
Six eagle guards in a box seems a bit much for an unusual figure.
My preference would be for the mounted officer as the sixth figure even WITHOUT the horse. Treat him as a foot figure without a base. And can he be looking forward?
If we can't have a horseless riding officer I would prefer to see the foot officer duped.
OK, how many of you guys would like to see a horseless mounted officer?
Hi
horseless mounted would be ok as there are several horses available on the market that could be utilised
9th
So are there several horses available on the market that could be utilized?
mounted officer without a horse will be helpful
Definietly not an extra eagle guard please. Extra drummers or dismounted officer would be good. Not sure on the idea of a horseless officer though - as I do not know what officer horses are available in this scale, and frankly I would prefer to be patient to see where you guys go regards mounted troops in general (maybe a combined mounted command set - couple of French, Brit and Prussian or some such).
Sorry, forgot to say - but is the plume right for 1815? Other photos have shown the shorter, bushier plume, which I thought was 1815 pattern - this version looks like the 1812 style.
officer without a horse would be nice
production as in the photo without a horse
Already express that I'm in favour to a mounted figure, even without horse, but suggest to HaT to test the figure with horses now available in the market and eveentuallt select one, even without revealing publicaly the brand. This rises another issue, as when later HaT release they own horses, size and shape should be compatible.
I may be a minority, but feel a horse should be provided; I've just not been that impressed with the quality of horses available in 1/32 Napoleonic plastic for the prices asked.
Still, would rather have the officer than not. I do not have a problem with set configuration as stands. Wonder if a multipurpose horse mold could be made which would/could serve as a horse for several sets, after all the furniture for various units and armies were often similar except for colors. I'm not talking about difference between sheepskin shabraques and clothe, just saying that basically you had just a few distinct types of shabraques, sheepskin, cloth that was pointed and cloth that was rounded; the major difference was in color and decorations. Say you make a horse with French infantry cut; how many other armies could that be used for if you didn't engrave distinct French insignia but left it to the collector to paint it at discretion?
Often differences in horse furniture - and even uniforms can be solved with a deft paint brush.
One might even offer a configuration of two sprues of figures with a third of horses for the officers. (Or three sprues with a fourth separate horse sprue). It might be cost effective if you could get the use of the horses for other sets in the future.
Would this not make for a more useful horse and perhaps make it more practicable? Just trying to offer a workable solution.
If not, I would opt for the officer without the horse.
Another idea. You could do what other companies have done and offer a separate set of horses; THAT has worked very well for several companies. IMEX, TSSD, and CTS all sell their horses separately and do quite well. As for me, I'm always on the lookout for spare horses for my dismounted cavalry and the riderless horse on the battlefied.
Did I say I would love to keep the officer?
Just making sure...
If it is the only option, a mounted officer, even without horse would be welcome.
I would however also make another suggestion :
why not a combined set of mounted officers : a Bavarian / Wurtenberger / Russian / French : Prussian / Austrian offier in one sprue and with horses...
A combined set of mounted officers with horses seems almost impossible as people would have to buy and pay for expensive figures who may not need just to get a mounted officer to go with they foot figures. What can pay is to give customers what they want without making them pay for unwanted items.
I guess we need to think and find a solution to make a set of universal light and heavy horses. To me will be made of two parts, one with the head and the other with the tail and both sides would be interchangeable. The main problem will be the furniture and saddle and this may be an extra part, including or not a part of the horse body, and common to both heavy and light horses sets. Just painting furniture in large scales isn't enough and fall far from current HaT standards.
@All, we'll talk about horses later, but for now it looks like the vote is for the horseless officer.
Post a Comment