1. Forum
  2. Our Ranges and Games
  3. Blood Oaths: After Rome Falls, Who Will Conquer?
  4. What Dark Ages sets would you like to see next?

What Dark Ages sets would you like to see next?

  • SS

    @Brian Van De Walker 

    The last time Chariots are mentioned in chinese history is c. 119 BCE/BC, when a Han expeditionary force was ambushed by the Xiongnu people at Mo Bei. They were used to shield the infantry from horse archers. When they could win the momentum, chinese cavalry was hunting the Xiongnu.

    At this time the tactics in Han armies changed and they switch to recuit more allied tribes to replace chariots with more mobile light cavalry. After the Battle of Mo Bei, Chariots were no longer mentioned.

    It is debated if the chariot in China survided as "command posts" for Generals some time longer. This would be ironical because this is how chinese armies used chariots first when they were introduced c. 2000 years earlier.

    In India, Chariots disappeared mostly in the 1st Century BCE/BC from sources. It's said that the Kanva Dynasty of Magadha disbanded the chariots of the Magadhian armies when they had risen to power c. 75 BCE/BC. Sources from southern India are unknown on that topic.

  • Big Boi

    As mentioned before I think that going in on the Sassanian empire would be a great option. As WGA focuses on cavalry sets, it would be really cool to see some light horse archers or even cataphracts off the press. If we are being fully honest, the lightly armored nature of the persian box would make the bodies good enough for most sassanid infantry, WGA could possibly make an upgrade sprue with more period appropriate heads, shields, and weapons. 

  • BV

    @Ethan Gilbert Yeah they would be pretty fun, and they fullfill the bare minum of having a Saga board.

    They should probably start with the armored cataphracts. Particularly if they add this crossbow.

     

    @Steffen Seitter I am sure you did research, but apparently China still used them in warfare at least up till 613 CE, probably a bit beyond that given 800 where sent out, though they were clearly not as effective as they used to be, its was still there and post Decline and Fall too. You are right about India though, the war elephant replaced them.

  • Big Boi

    @Brian Van De Walker Actually yeah, most cataphracts that are out are too blatantly roman or byzantine to be used as a Sassanid army. as far as just horse archers go I feel like this box would be acceptable In general iran/persia is kind of underrepresented with the exception of Achemenids and while I know this would be for product lines other than this blood oaths, it would be cool to see a safavid set 

  • SS

    @Brian Van De Walker 

    The article sometimes confuses BCE with CE. The article refers to the year of 613 BCE not CE.

    As said the last mentioned use of chariots in chinese warfare was 119 BCE by the Han.

    0 likes
  • BV

    @Steffen Seitter

    If I am not mistaken the Tsu (or Sui) state rebellion they are referring to was either the Wagang rebellion or one of the others which happened around 611-613 CE/AD in China. The short lived Sui state ended China's Three Kingdoms period, built a great canal, is well remembered for its tryanny and is itself also a fixture of 6th-7th century CE/AD and had actively been fighting the kingdom of Goguryeo which was one of the big nations of what is known as the three kingdoms period of Korea's history (all started well into the CE/AD period). 

    Unless you can give me a hard example of a another "Tsu state" that was existing in earler 613 BCE China that also suffered from internal revolts, I will have to argue that the article writer DID NOT make a mistake with his CE label in this case since he would also be mixing up whole dynasties.

    In that example he was clearly referring to the early 7th century CE/AD China 35 year Sui Dynasty, though he made a big point that chariots had lost there prominence by then and had indeed been in decline for several centuries. Keyword being "decline", which means they were still used but not  effectively, but I can think of a reason for them to be still in use or even temporarly be reintroduced by the Sui empire at least.

    Diffrent topic but I get the feeling that after the  Sassanian empire and maybe the Franks, there really isn't much to the dark ages that isn't validly covered with Vikings and whats out there already (at least in Saga Board land🤣).

     

     

    0 likes
  • SS

    From "Ancient China simplified": by Edward Harper Parker:

    "In the year of 632 BC, when Tsin inflicted a great defeat uopn it's chief rival Ts'u, the former power had 700 chariots in the field. Again in 632 Tsin offered to the Emperor 100 chariots just captured from Ts'u, and in 613 sent 800 chariots to the assistance of a dethroned Emperor."

    The Articles autor seems to read that book and mixed something up because Parker forgot the "BC" after those dates.

    It's consense that chariots disappeared from chinese warfare latest in 100 BCE and that the Han were the last Dynasty for using them on combat.

    0 likes
  • BV

    @Steffen Seitter  I will give you that is the consesense because of Wikipedia agreeing on that and it not being worth fighting over.

    However your personal argument is not convincing for the following reasons:

    1. You used a snippet from general historic overview written in the 19th century by a British historian whose main focus was also the 19th century. Access and research on the topic of Ancient Chinese warfare has advanced quite a bit since then and there is no guarantee he is right about anything from before British contact (western history of China is not always the same or as accurate as Chinese and Taiwanese history of China).
    2. For battles numbered dates and head counts (in this case the number of chariots) are things historians would normally get wrong and in the case of Asian history place names (all the things that match),  not which side of Christ's birth the conflict  happened on or details of who was fighting who.
    3. I asked for a peasant revolt (as mentioned in the first article), you gave me what is very clearly a barbarian invasion (the events don't match).
    4. Given that the Han essentially revived Chariot use for their war against the Xiongnu (which lasted 133 BC/BCE to 89 AD/CE)one could easily argue that chariot use in Chinese warfare might be one of those things that the Chinese redid every once and while, most likely to give them additional mobile range options to help supplement horse archers or for infantry support.

     

    0 likes
  • M

    @Brian Van De Walker honestly, it pretty much has to if you want to avoid doing retreads of largely the same units. the differences between Romano-british, Saxon, Franks, etc is pretty small, due to them all deriving from the late Roman stuff.

    while China might be a stretch since the "dark ages" period is generally a geographically european focus (as the same period of 6th to 10th century in asian history tends to be defined by different reference points ,and the two halves of the continent had very little direct interaction), the time period does include the Byzantines, which while also deriving from thae late roman stuff, took their styles in their own directions. but my suggestion would be to look at some of the regions that aren't often covered and especially not done in plastic.

    like the Umayyad Caliphate and the Iberian Christian kingdoms, since the Umayyads invade and conquer much of the iberian penninsula early in the period, and the start of the Reconquista begins near the end fo the period. which is a period with a lot of dramatic battles and has a number of rulesets allowing play during it, but which has little plastic figure support.

    i'd also love to see the early Norse from the 8th and early 9th century. most of the figures out there are from the later 9th and 10th-11th centuries when they were more well equipped and more organized as armies. it would be nice to see a kit with mostly unarmored warriors and fewer swords and more axes, spears, and a few bows. maybe also do some Slavs and the Slav-influenced Norse Rus, which would combine elements of both. (bonus points if you could use the latter to do Jomsvikings. :) )

  • Dark Don

    @Grumpy Gnome what range is the chariot from?

  • JTam

    @Dark Don 

    I haven't seen Grump Gnome around in a while .....

    If you mean this chariot?:

    It looks like the Victrix plastic kit:

  • BV

    @JTam Thats cause it is Victrix plastic, you can tell by the Boudica model.

     

  • Caratacus

    @JTam  

    Indeed it is one model from the Victrix plastic Celtic Chariot kit.

    0 likes
  • MW

    For me Franks (which look like they are coming soon) then Carolingians (although early medieval) 

  • Caratacus

    @Matthew Williamson I'm certainly interested to see the Merovingian Franks as well, though with the advent of Vox Populi they'll likely be pushed down the queue as more nurks keep voting for Halflings and Death Fields stuff. 

    Carolingian Franks would be interesting as well, though I wonder what the differences are, if any?

    0 likes
  • BV

    @Caratacus I think the diffrence is the Carolingian Franks had more heavy cavalry and a wider array of exotic house guards, they are essentially early knight armies with lots of mercs could be wrong though.

  • Caratacus

    I've noticed WA have trialled some Welsh sculpts on WA Digital:

    Clearly they didn't read my post in this thread expressing my wish for an alternative approach to Dark Age Welsh (but then it was largely drowned out by various bleatings about campy Shieldmaidens), so I will relay it for the benefit of those who missed it the first time:

    "I also want to see an alternative set of Welsh, I really can't get on board with the primitive barefoot look that many manufacturers have given theirs. Because there is relatively little that has been written down regarding the nature of Welsh troops prior to the Middle Ages the subject is up for different interpretations, and personally I would have thought they would have been more advanced than the backwater Gaels and Picts (the Celtic Britons certainly were, and given that they had also been Romanised by this time, I would have thought they would have been closer to their Saxon rivals in terms of their equipment, just with their army structure revolving more around archers and heavy cavalry than heavy infantry).

    As mentioned in another thread I'm a big fan of Mierce's Darklands models, and their Welsh models look really good:

    Teulu (literally 'family' or household troops - would more often have been mounted in reality but some may well have fought on foot):

    Rhyfelwyr (Warriors - standard Welsh infantry, I know these wouldn't all be wearing chainmail - that honour would have been reserved mainly for the Teulu - which is why I'm advocating for a set with unarmoured bodies, and the Shields would be round, but otherwise you get the picture):

    Helwyr (Hunters - these would most likely have been the stereotypical Welsh border raiders, skilled with both a bow and a sword and with a cloak and hood that, while maybe wouldn't have had leaves affixed to it, would still have been dark green to better camouflage the wearer from pursuing enemies)

    Saethwyr (Archers - ranged troops superior to those of other factions, but vulnerable in melee of course):

    While they possess a bit of a fantastical edge, I would certainly like to see Wargames Atlantic make a version of these closer to historically-accurate Dark Ages costume, in particular if their parts are compatible with the Late Roman Lorica Hamata troops to allow a kitbasher to turn them into unarmoured Romano-British infantry or the Late Romans into Welsh Teulu on foot, and if WA release a Late Roman Heavy Cavalry set as well, the same method could be applied to make mounted Teulu.

    Something like this:

    • 5 unarmoured bodies on the sprue, similar to those of the Goths - armoured bodies can be obtained elsewhere
    • Heads mainly with moustaches rather than beards, some helmeted and some unhelmeted (both of which are compatible with the Lorica Hamata Late Romans to make foot Teulu), plus some hooded heads for Helwyr
    • Enough bows to equip every model in the kit with one if desired
    • Plenty of sword and spear arms for melee troops and enough shields to equip every model in the kit with one if desired
    • At least two or three cloaks per sprue for Helwyr
    • Javelins for skirmishers, and for melee infantry to throw at a charging foe, perhaps?

    WA have already made the especially characterful set of Irish for Blood Oaths, so I certainly hope that they'll see that a set of Welsh in the style I've mentioned would be an equally-characterful set to follow it up."

     

    If my suggestions are taken into account when these are developed to become a plastic set, you'll have got at least one sale from me, I'm still biding my time when it comes to looking for archers for my own British/Welsh army.

    0 likes
  • g

    Not sure I'd want the fantasy element but I do agree that WA Welsh sculpts have more in common with the old Gripping Beast Welsh or even the newer Footsore Early Welsh. I must admit I see this as a trope used by wargamers simply to differentiate the Welsh from the Saxons on the table. The evidence for this is so flimsy, often from biased Norman sources, and from the high medieval period.

    I do note the the recent Osprey book on Post-Roman Kingdoms 450-800AD only has single example of a warrior from the period with no trousers or shoes. So perhaps we are seeing some revision of this trope. I find it hard to justify that say Cadwallon's warband in 630AD would look much different from the "Romano-British" or "early Saxon" in visual appearance. Perhaps different brooches, hair cut or colours. Running around with no shoe (or in some cases) one shoe (!) seems rather a stretch. 

    Not that it makes much difference since WA seems unwiling to actually sell any of these scuplts to us in anything other than digital format. Back to Victrix then ...

  • Caratacus

    @graham I agree that the fantastical elements of the Mierce Welsh shouldn't be included (though the hoods and cloaks on the Helwyr look cool and wouldn't have been unheard of, especially on scouts as they are), but you get the message I was intending to preach - that the simple, barefoot primitive design of many Dark Age Welsh models just doesn't feel right for the successors of the Romano-British, and that it's time to refresh the perspective.

    I thoroughly agree that the most likely aesthetic of Welsh troops would probably be very similar to the Anglo-Saxons, especially if, concerning the Anglo-Saxons, you look past the traditional 'ethnic cleansing' theories propagated by bitter anti-English 'Celtic' scholars and arrogant pro-German 'Saxon' scholars alike to explain how the Angles, Saxons and Jutes settled in Britain. In reality the  would have been much more a process of immigration, integration and an overall merging of cultures, with most Britons in these areas just adopting a Germanic veneer (and some taking Germanic spouses) for ease of getting on in society, but still otherwise remaining British genetically and in some aspects culturally and linguistically.

    The people in Wales, Cornwall and Yr Hen Ogledd (the Old North, in the areas now known as Cumbria and Strathclyde), meanwhile, preserved more of the Brythonic language principally because they lived furthest west from the areas where the migrants landed (most of the new arrivals weren't going to walk or ride all that way), and because the areas they lived in were the most geographically isolated and inaccessible, and so their culture still remained largely the same as it had been before the Germanic migrants' arrival. This thus makes it all the more unlikely that they would have degenerated into barefooted primitives in the league of the genuinely comparatively backward Picts, Irish and Scots, who never benefitted from the advancements of the Romans or even the pre-Roman Brythonic Celts.

    Thus the English and Welsh 'races' could thus easily be seen as cousins, both being the results of Romano-British communities diverging onto different paths due to differing circumstances, and thus there is no reason why a Welsh army would be drastically different from a Saxon one.

    However, a few small touches in which such an army could be distinguished from a Saxon force would be mixing some Late Roman weapons, armour and headgear amongst the models (as it was so much cheaper to just wear an old helmet inherited from your Romano-British ancestors than have a brand-new one made, for example), shield designs with more a combination of stereotypically Roman and Celtic designs than Germanic ones, and, I personally like to think, a greater prevalence of moustaches over full beards, a nod back to Ancient Celtic vs Germanic hairstyle preferences. All of these feature in my own Dark Age Welsh army that I've started, through combining the Wargames Atlantic Late Roman Infantry and Gripping Beast Dark Age Welsh (luckily three bodies per sprue in that set are decent with shoes and trousers, and I plan to greenstuff shoes and trousers on the other two) kits, plus adding a good few weapons and heads from Warlord's Celtic Warriors. I also plan to grab the Victrix Late Roman Unarmoured Infantry set as there are some cracking Celtic and Romano-British heads in there that will be put to good use.

    Yeah it is a pain that WA focus more on other eras and settings for their plastic kits (particularly Death Fields, Campy Fantasy and World Ablaze) right now, but as you've said, luckily Victrix have come to the rescue with their great Late Roman kits.

    0 likes
  • Big Boi

    I am once again calling for the release of contenental troops. The "Dark age army builder" works fine for levy but there should be a box of armored infantry which could work as carolingins, ottonians, normans, or whatever else. 

     

    Also some western steppe nomads to be used as Magyars or Alans. I gotta be able to do the battle at the Lechfeld

  • Big Boi

    In an attempt to revive this thread I want to ask everyone what they want from this line that hasn't been fulfilled since this post was made originally some years ago. 

    The plastics have been slow rolling but Atlantic Digital has been generous in providing things like vikings, Byzantines, and Carolingians. They've even released the Nubian spearmen which I have been using extensively with some modification for a Mali-inspired project. 

     

    I would love to see Magyars as stated earlier but I also think an extension of the Missipian line and an incurion into Tang dynasty China would be fun to see

  • BV

    @Big Boi If they do the Tang Dynasty, they should also do later Three Kingdoms Korea and maybe even Japan for that timeframe. (Not sure why there isn't a fanmade SAGA ruleset for the Three Kingdom Korea, since it would fit that game perfect).

  • LL

    I know this is an old topic that I'm ressurrecting here, but there are now digital Shieldmaidens so this discussion seems relevant to bring up again.  The design of the STLs looks like they are intended for plastic injection moulding, but it hasn't been completed yet.  I know that I'd instantly buy a couple of these if they were released in plastic, but the current weapon options look a bit lacking.  I'd expect a few extra options in a proper kit, such as maybe 2x spears, 2x javelins, 2x bows in addition to the swords, axes and shields already in the STLs.  A couple of nice to haves would be some additional heads, especially with some longer flowing hair, the ability to add some braids, etc.  Some other bits, like some daggers or hatchets to add to their belts, quivers, packs of javelins, and maybe a cloak or two and some fur trim for over their shoulders as well would be nice, especially to help build some leaders or command models from the kit.  

    The renders I've seen look really good, but I'd much prefer to use plastic than resin, so I'm holding out on these for now.  

    0 likes
  • M

    Shieldmaidens are a fantasy product line, not historical. While there is increasing evidence that women were involved in martial skills more often than was previously assumed for the era, there is little to suggest that women regularly were involved in warfare, and no evidence of whole units/armies of them.

    So discussion of them should be moved to the fantasy dection, and this thread focused on actual historicals.

  • BV

    @Logan Lewis ,Mithril is right on them being numerically skechty historically and honestly Shieldmaidens will look cooler  and stand out better on the table done with fantasy in mind even if we are talking SAGA (which is the real important thing, alot of the "historicial chicks in chainmail" I have seen WA doing STLs of tend to look too much like thier male counterparts to be really worth doing.

    Now if you where talking about a general "Women of the Dark Ages" set with more unarmored and unarmed poses in some daily activity and/or in distress situations (like being taken away by raiders) in addition to some Shieldmaiden options, NOW that would be useful.   

    0 likes
  • LL

    @Brian Van De Walker I was thinking more shieldmaiden-like with unarmored and lightly armoured bodies, with some head and weapon options that would look more generic to make the kits viable for use elsewhere too.  But the alternate, with a "women of the dark ages" set with shieldmaiden options would be great as well.  Either would work for me.  Women were undoubtedly part of fighting forces in the past, even if it closer to a militia than a professional fighting force, so having models for this still does feel appropriate for a historical miniature line.  

    EDIT - And this line has already been started by WGA.  

    https://www.myminifactory.com/object/3d-print-viking-shieldmaidens-288706

    I'd just like to seen this turned into a plastic kit and flushed out with more weapons, heads, and some extra bits for flavour.  These bodies are generic enough where I think they could already pass for the "women of the dark ages" theme.  

    0 likes
  • BV

    @Logan Lewis I think it should be l"the women of the Dark Ages" first with more utility parts and less weapons since even considering shield maidens  as a historical  set topic by themselves or as a list in a historical wargame is a sign  the miniature manufacturer or ruleset designer needs to desperately move beyond the confines of European history, Hollywood, and/or the Viking Era. 

    I mean at roughly the same time alone the Tang Empire rose to power in China after unifying the 10 kingdoms and was pulling off all sorts schemes in Asia, Korea was in their chaotic "3 kingdom" era, South East Asia had all sorts of stuff go down,   the Islamic world was conquering places such as North Africa like it was nobody's business, and a good many of the Silk Road Wars happened.

    With all that going on why focus on a sexy but heavily debated fringe  topic that may get debunk or (more likely) heavily re-adjusted later on as more evidence pours in? a topic that also happend in an unimportant backwater for the time most noted for providing wool and white slaves to the Eastern Roman Empire and Islamic world? (Cause that’s what Northern Europe was to the rest of the world at the time, just a place to get those two trade goods, maybe lumber wood as well, but you get the picture and I am tired of us all pretending its more important than that, it just isn’t until the late 1400’s). 

     

    0 likes
  • LL

    "why focus on a sexy but heavily debated fringe  topic"

    Because it might sell better?  I know I'd pick up a couple kits like that for some added variety and a fun thing to paint.  It would fit in with existing kits I have for games I play.  I don't really care that it isn't the most important thing going on in the world at the time.  I would be interested in this, and considering other responses in this thread, there are clearly other people interested in this too.

    I don't want WGA to make a "sexy" kit for this.  It would be very off-brand for them to do something like that considering the styling of all of their other kits.....  And I don't know if you looked at the STLs they've already started developing, but they definitely didn't lean into the "sexy" aesthetic for it.  Exaggerated proportions to make it clearer that they are female minitures?  Sure, I'll agree with that.  But we're already talking about heroic scaling here, so imo it fits.  

    WGA makes kits to sell.  There's lots of other historical designs that could be done by them.  While I'm aware that many other things were going on worldwide during that time period, I'm not personally interested in buying, building, or painting minis for that.  

    Dark ages also is a term that is typically applied to european history.  You're right that there's lots of other stuff going on in the world at the time, but the name itself it does lead towards a european setting.....

    0 likes
  • M

    yes it might sell.. but put it into the fantasy line, where it fits better, because it's *not historical.* i get that shieldmaidens are a fixation of yours as far as kits goes, but the historicals lines are not where it belongs.

    0 likes
  • BV

    @Logan Lewis It might not (I think female sets tend to under perform), the responses are old and from what can be labeled as a vocal minority doesn't know history (some of them wanted Chariots with those sheild maidens for gosh sake), and it sucks as a histoical topic since its just not that intresting, I mean its basicly vikings as action girls, both of which are currently on the decline for a couple of diffrent reasons.

    1. Vikings are one of the most overdone and over hyped topics not just in miniature war gaming but in general pop culture.(They just are). They aren't very deep wargame topic either (like the Decline and Fall sets pratically cover for them already, and have a more intresting arsenal at the same time).

    2. Pop culture is over saturated with action girls archtypes at the moment and due to some preachy people will likly stay that way, its kinda of "meh who cares" at this point for mainstream media veiwers (they are boring in other words). Admittedly its not quite wrecked for plastic minature wargaming yet (and I do mean yet) but under the circumstances I think it should be limited to fictional topics and stuff confirmable in largish numbers when comes to historical gaming like 20th century or non-Europe topics that have better records of female fighters than Dark Age Europe. Sheild maidens,  just are never going to be confirmable beyond a handful individuals and they are tied to one of the most boring places in Europe even for the time. 

    3. the most fun thing about Vikings is them being adventurers (which makes sense, Scandinavia is as boring as it is cold), this is not true of the sheild maidens who seemed to have just defended the farms back home for the most part outside Leaf Erickson's oddball sister who was a psychotic moutian of mucles  that would sell better as a metal character sculpt than a plastic set topic (she ran after people with shears and kitchen implaments if I recall correctly and I don't think she ever botherd with proper weapons despite being listed as sheild maiden, probably the most famous one at that ironically).

    I could also throw in the "political issues" with both topics but those nothing bugers, particularly compared to lack of historical justification  and just being boring.   

    Edit: Oh and setting all that aside if it is WA doing them for History or Fantasy instead of Death Fields, the sheild maidens in question ARE NOT GOING TO BE HEROIC SCALE AT ALL, but HISTORICAL SCALE (ie they will look like they might actually be able to ride around in the 1/56 scale tanks Warlord keeps selling that are dwarfed by thier oversized Cinimatic scale plastic infantry). They should be fantasy and have alternate fantasy race heads.

     

     

    0 likes
  • LL

    @Brian Van De Walker

    I think we’re talking past each other a bit here.

    You’re presenting your opinions as if they’re objective truths, and dismissing other people’s interests as “boring,” “unimportant,” or “overhyped.” That kind of framing makes it hard to have a productive discussion, because it implies that anyone who disagrees with you is simply wrong rather than having different preferences.

    From a historical standpoint, a “Dark Ages” line is, by definition, going to be European‑focused. That doesn’t make China, Korea, or the Islamic world irrelevant, it just means they belong to different ranges, not the Dark Ages line. WGA has multiple lines covering different eras and regions, and people are allowed to be interested in whichever slice appeals to them.

    On the scale issue: heroic vs. historical scale isn’t about cultural importance, it’s about sculpting proportions and durability. WGA’s plastics, including their fantasy kits, routinely exaggerate proportions for casting reasons. The existing Shieldmaiden STLs already follow that approach. I like this aesthetic, and I don't want to see WGA make a line of fur or chainmail bikini wearing shieldmaidens to fit the exaggerated fantasy theme.....

    At the end of the day, WGA makes kits that people want to buy. Several folks in this thread have said they’d be interested in a plastic Shieldmaiden or “women of the Dark Ages” kit. I'm adding my voice stating that I'm also interested in this. You may not find the topic compelling, and that’s completely fine, but it doesn’t make it invalid, unworthy, or historically impossible. It just means it’s not for you.

    0 likes
  • BV

     

    @Logan Lewis No, they should just do them all in Blood Oaths since its the same time frame and the Islamic world was heavily involved with Southern Europe all through out the time frame, and everyone fought and interacted with the Islamic World during the Dark Ages practically except the Americias.

    Likewise several people in this thread have also asked for  Middle Eastern topic sets and unlike the sheild maiden askers they have  real historical info backing said middle eastern topics to justify wanting them plastic box numbers, sheildmaidens on the other where an exterme minority IRL based on what we have on them and is still debated, like named (they should be just stay as STLS if sheildmaidens for history is the sole goal, and they should stayway from the fantasy dreadlocks hollywood keeps giving them, nobody wore those in Europe).

    Plus Europe is so bland at the time you really could just use the Goths and Late Romans for the whole line. You could probably use them for everyting from Welsh to Pagan Volga Slavs depending on the paint job you give them.  

    There just really isn't a good reason to focus only Europe for any time frame, Dark Ages inculded, and I am far from the only one who thinks that.

    Historical plastic set tend to need to be  warband level topics,  "women of the Dark Ages" with captive and civilian poses in addtion to 1 or 2 parts for lady fighters  is more useful in that regardes and logical historically  than doing a whole set of just sheild maidens since sheild maidens where all named heros  in the records and there where no all Sheildmaiden warbands IRL Viking Scandinavia, plus a lot of them where also noted breserkers. Meaning you don't need a whole box of sheildmaidens nor want them for historical  gaming and ironically armor bikinis might be closer and preferable to the typical battle dress for shieldmaidens than we want to think (which likely would be thier brithday suits or states of undress cause breserkers). 

    Lastly most of the folks asking for shieldmaidens in this thread were fantasy players like all of the other folks asking for rare bird European female warriors topics in plastic from time frames before guns equalized things. It should be a fantasy set if we are just talking white European warrior women archtypes in plastic, not a history set just because some Queen Helga was badass in that Viking movie 😆. (Pick a non-European topic for your historical warrior women in plastic, there are plenty female fighters in better numbers for plastic documinted elsewhere in the world even at the time of the Vikings than anywhere or when in Europe's pre-gun century history🙄).  

    0 likes
  • M

    i would point out that just because a set is included under the fantasy line does not automatically mean it'll have to be using the more 'heroic' sculpting style. the handful of human sets in the fantasy line so far come from collaborations with other companies where they chose that style for aesthetics reasons. a set WGA itself makes could be done wither way. (it is also worth noting that WGA's hidtoricals and scifi lines aren't sculpted all that differently in terms of body proportion, its mostly a case of the scifi line having the typically bulkier armor and gear. that's one of the the reasons why people like WGA's historicals for kitbashing)

     

    the thing is, if they remain in the historicals line.. they aren't liekly to ever make it to plastic. because there just isn't much demand for sheildmaidens in the historicals miniatures community. and what demand is present is handled just find by the metal figure sets made by Bad Squiddo and Footsore. because a historicals player is rarely going to want more than and handful of figures to pepper into their skirmish games for flavor. there just isn't call for a box of 25+ female norse/saxon/etc warriors with historicals. so they'll probably end up staying as a 3D print option only.

    but if you market them towards fantasy players, there is a much much bigger demand for female minatures, especially non-sexualized female miniatures, in the fantasy gaming community. and people wanting to build entire armies of them, because fantasy doesn't have any 'historical reality' limitations.

  • BV

    @Mithril2098 I do think there might be a demand for Female captive and civilian figures in history gaming and having enough parts for 1 (count it 1) female warrior won't hurt such a set.

    But I agree that a SAGA warband box of sheild maidens should be done with age of magic and whatsmore include both sensible and unsensible clothing as well, perhaps with "Americian football" team type parts. 

    0 likes
  • 1
  • 2 / 2
Please login to reply to this topic!

Search

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Page views (24h):
1,242
Page views (30d):
23,594
Topics:
1,079
Posts:
16,650
Members:
2,669

Newest members

© 2026, Wargames Atlantic | Powered by Xenforum