‘Timeless’ Figures

[Whirlwind]

In this thread, the following comment was made:

Shahbahraz wrote:

One of the real arguments for paying more for better figures is that they have longevity… standards and styles change, so what was an acceptable figure in 1990 is often not an acceptable figure now, but the Anthony Barton sculpted Sasanians I bought in 1995 or so, still stand comparison with current offerings. The same could not be said for many 1990s figures.

Which pre-2000 ranges do you think would fall into this category?

[Mike Headden]

At a wargaming distance of five or six feet and with a decent paint job, who’s going to notice?

I’m not that fussed about consistent height or build of figures either, real units are full of men of different shapes and sizes …. unless you are fighting the Clone Wars!

Beautifully sculpted figures just take longer to paint, cost more and do no better on the tabletop.

There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

[Mike]

There is the OSR movement around GW and many of the new sculpts emulate the look of those citadel figures of the 80’s and 90’s.
So they have a popular aesthetic and the original figures can command a big price.

On a personal note, I have a soft spot for the sublime Mithril LOTR figures that were very subtle and exquisite.
I recall actually waiting a while until I practiced my painting so I could do them justice.

[jeffers]

Acceptable to whom?

Mike H +1.

More nonsense on my blog: http://battle77.blogspot.com/

[Mike]

Mike Headden wrote:

At a wargaming distance of five or six feet and with a decent paint job, who’s going to notice?

Me for one. I always like to take a close look at the models to appreciate them and the painting.

[Whirlwind]

If I understood the intent of the quoted poster, he didn’t mean “ranges which will still serve a good gaming purpose”, he meant “ranges which are still at the top of their particular style”.

Mike wrote:

On a personal note, I have a soft spot for the sublime Mithril LOTR figures that were very subtle and exquisite.

They are lovely…

[Mike Headden]

Mike wrote:

Mike Headden wrote:

At a wargaming distance of five or six feet and with a decent paint job, who’s going to notice?

Me for one. I always like to take a close look at the models to appreciate them and the painting.

And you’d be welcome. But that won’t change my choice of figures.

I remember Mithril LotR figures too. They were the first figures I liked but didn’t buy because they were “ludicrously expensive” …. at over a pound each. O tempora, o mores! 🙂

There are 100 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who can work from incomplete data

[ian pillay]

For me my soft spot is for the original Rouge Trader MKVI (Beakie) space marines. They are packed full of character, not like the neat rank and file marines of the 90’s in there fancy MKVII armour. I have a fairly large collection that I am still painting up after all these years.

Tally-Ho! Check out my blog at…..
http://steelcitywargaming.wordpress.com/

[Phil Dutré]

I still have heaps of unpainted figures from the 80s and 90s. And I’m still planning to paint them and play with them. And I still hunt for them and collect them.

For me, it’s quite the contrary. The style and visuals of modern figures leave me cold. Too clean, too detailed, too emotionless, no character. Moreover, I don’t like the fact that many plastic figures these days are not toy soldiers anymore, they’re modelkits.

 

[Whirlwind]

Which ranges are you thinking of, Phil?

[MartinR]

The original Airfix German Infantry, 8th Army, Afrika Korps and Commando sets have a certain goofy charm. I also like the original H&R sculpts, although I gather many of them are being redone in more modern bloated “6mm” now. Scale creep gets everyone in the end.

"Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

[jeffers]

Indeed, I maintain Type 1 Airfix are the ideal wargaming figures. They were designed for children to paint and look good at ‘playing distance’. They are also quite robust. In other words, suitable for the majority of wargamers!

More nonsense on my blog: http://battle77.blogspot.com/

[Whirlwind]

Those Airfix sets were very nice, I had loads of them as a bairn.  I think that the Zvezda ones are a little bit nicer although the Airfix ones hold up pretty well.

[Mike6t3]

I’m currently painting some Asgard Miniatures Orts (now sold by Alternative Armies). Must be 1980 ish sculpts and cracking little minis. Not too fussy but well sculpted, not difficult to paint and a wash really brings the detail out.

Get there fastest with the mostest and roll highest.

Mike

[irishserb]

I utterly disagree with the quote in the initial post.  Though I don’t think the original author of the quote meant it in this way, addressing what figures are “acceptable” for use today, almost feels a little like someone telling me that I’m not playing with toy soldiers properly.  It is just philosophically different from my approach.

I still have some of my figures that were sculpted in the late 1970s and early 1980s, some of them not fantastic sculpts artistically,  but they are more to me than an aesthetically or technically critiqued creation.  They also hold a piece of the enthusiasm and sensation that I had at the time that I received them.  They have a history as characters, heroes, and villians.  They are more to than the sum of their physical parts, as they have been with me for 40 years.  Not only are they acceptable, despite maybe being the product of more basic skills, materials, and tools, but in many instances, they are preferred to more modern figures, without consideration of style, scale, or accuracy.

They are “timeless” to me because of their overall appeal, which encompasses more than just their detail and accuracy.  They include 15mm Heritage/Quality Castings 15mm WWII infantry, various heritage fantasy figures, Ral Partha fantasy, Superior Models fantasy figures, Firefight 20 Vietnam and Cold War figs, late 1980s GW Imperial Guard, and many others.

[Alan Hamilton]

Most of my metal figures are “timeless” as they were bought (or made) in the 1960s to 1990s.  As a result most of my recent purchases have been of second hand figures in compatible ranges of 25mm and small 28mm figures.  I have very few of the scale creep “28mm” or “heroic 28mm”.

But to answer the question my “timeless” figures come from various Garrison ranges, Citadel historicals, some Minifigs, Grenadier, Amazon Miniatures, Wargames Foundry, Greenwood and Ball and others of that ilk.  So sometimes I do pay extra to get replacements or new units of old figures.

[Thaddeus Blanchette]

Copplestone’s stuff is timeless. Perry Bros. too.

We get slapped around, but we have a good time!

[Who Asked This Joker]

Metal Magic figures are still quite nice by today’s standards.  I just finished painting a Dwarf fighter.  I  had bought the 25 character pack from  Mega Miniatures a years ago who acquired the range.

John

"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

--Abraham Lincoln

[Author]

Posts