Update from today, 27 FEB 23:
Needless to say I'm psyched for this months releases.
I won't rehash the same material again, but my ideas for female models are here:
https://wargamesatlantic.com/community/xenforum/topic/85084/monthly-themes
2023 March Digital Releases
-
-
Nice.
Pretty dang cool.
My only nitpick is that I wish they were a little more obviously women. Women have hips and other curves. Should be very obvious, particularly in the skin tight pants popular at the time. Some traits may have to be exaggerated in order to make it obvious these are women when seen 4 feet away on the tabletop. If you can't tell they are women what is the point? This is not a double standard, note the square jaws, wide shoulders, and general jackedness of the WGA male miniatures.
-
Ehhh.... they appear to have wider hips and narrower shoulders than the male sculpts to me. Silicone boobs are far in the future.
-
Sigh.
Let's try it this way:
Can you tell these are female minis? If not, the mission is not accomplished.
-
Hi, Anaia...
We can consider that the military dress of the time is not necessarily very fitted (which is often wrong : tailors were very skilled)... even if we distinguish easily, on the photos of your 3rd Infantry Honor Guard (musicians, in red uniforms), the women from the men, at first glance.
Idem for the riding Guard uniforms of the young Queen Elizabeth (cf. old photos during the "Trooping the Colours" ceremony) : the morphology/anatomy of a woman is not exactly the same, for sure...
I see two problems : 1. some of the (mainly) right arms seem too short (1st, 3rd) ; 2. the pleats of the breeches (culottes or bridge pants - pantalons à pont) are too protuding. Those "she-soldiers" look like they have "very big balls" Sorry... that's a joke in french : when someone is very courageous, brave, we can say "il/elle a des burnes", "il/elle est couillu(e)" (slang).
Regards.
-
@Pierre Lerdou-Udoy
Agreed. I've served in uniform for over two decades... And you can generally tell a male from female Soldier at a glance at up to 100 meters.
The renders do have a lot going on in the crotch region.
The expression of having big balls = being brave is exactly the same in English.
-
Look around for some reenactors. You cannot fully trust paintings in regard to how a uniform hangs.
I'm not seeing much distinction between the two pants shown here.
-
To be fair, female re-enactors are generally required to appear as 'man-like' as possible for most historical groups when portraying only-male troops. The aim is for them to blend in so as not to put off the stitch-counters. As a gamer, I want my female figures to be patently women, not women disguised as men. That may not be what everyone wants but I would prefer it to be obvious.
If that means exaggerating the female characteristics or changing the uniforms then I am all for that.
-
The difference in morphology requires adaptation of parade and tradition uniforms (shoulders, chest, hips...) : women's tunics tend to be a little looser in the chest and tighter in the waist.
No women in the French army when I was young : 1 year of compulsory service, just for us, with shaving every day. Beards and mustaches prohibited (rare exceptions) ! "Tout fout le camp" (everything scampers off)...
A question for the former soldier, my Good JTam... If today's combat uniforms are more unisex, I guess some of the combat gear (webbings) are slightly differents, or not ? Straps passing directly over a woman's chest can hurt, I suppose... unless the flak vest is a kind of buoy ?
I second your point of view, Paul : a slight exaggeration of the forms, without excess, or a slightly different cut of the uniforms would be interesting (while remaining close to the style of the time).
-
@Pierre Lerdou-Udoy Exactly! We don't need pin-up girl versions of the uniforms or figures, but changing them enough to highlight that the mini is female would be ideal.
-
We're also not talking stretch fabric. I think the sculpts are fine - thay have visibly female faces, visibly wider hips and visibly narrower shoulders, although the latter is obscured by the epaulettes a little.
-
That's right. However...
However, female soldiers do not represent historical reality, with rare exceptions. Even today, in our "western armies", there are very few women in frontline combat units (those who directly kill and are killed). They are mainly assigned to health, support and logistic functions...
The spirit of the times is for military women, but our modern armies today include only between 5 and 20% women. No more... and most perform non-combat duties and tasks. The British army for example, which still knows how to hit hard when needed, remains very circumspect about feminization... This is true in all "fire-ready" elite corps.
I'm going to pass for a "conservative", but I think that the female soldier is still communication, a concession to the spirit of the times. I believe that the "hobbyist" (a man, often) does not want reality, but women who look like women... Right or wrong ?
Izan ontsa (be well).
-
This is going to be a fun month...
-
A neat bonus.
The full kit is exciting.
-
@Pierre Lerdou-Udoy
Reference:
Uniforms. The US Army actually started issuing ACU-As (Army Combat Uniform - Alternate) a few years back for female Soldiers. The blouses are narrower in the shoulders and waist and flare at the bottom. The pants have a bigger seat and are cut for hips. The waistband incorporates some elastic I believe. The end result is that female Soldiers cut an even more unmistakable female figure in uniform than they used to.
I personally thinks it needlessly complicates supply (there are a metric shit ton of "male" ACU sizes... one of them will fit anyone). Now the US Army has to carry 2 x metric shit tons of uniform sizes.
Webbing/Combat Gear. There is supposedly some female cut body armor floating around but it is a very rare item and I've never seen it in real life. There's supposedly less soft armor in the shoulder area letting females shoulder a rifle a little easier. (Note: the Gen IV IOTVs are cut pretty narrow in the shoulder now anyway so there may be no need for "female" armor). I don't know if there are any female SAPI plates in the Army system. Without female cut plates the body armor will always be uncomfortable for female Soldiers. Female Soldiers have told me that the plate is uncomfortable standing up and even more so when shooting in the prone. But "You suck it up."
-
@JTam Actually based on articles I have read I can confirm the armor existing and them making more of it apparently the standard large "male" armor size created defense gaps when worn by smaller people that snipers could take advantage of and did quite alot not to mention using the bathroom😆(though the bun hair hole thing does seem like waste, but what the heck🤣). Likewise from what I recall reading once the old standard male sized BDUs apparently rub/chaff our girls raw possibly to the point of bleeding in embarassing areas (think about your crouch area getting to that point during combat, cause that was kind of what they were "sucking up" from what I was hearing and if you don't need to imagine cause you lived it than you probbably should have spoke up about it since that does not seem like good fighting condtion for a soldier).
All that aside, I agree with you on the Nappy guard, they look more like"long haired Swedish dudes in french uniforms selling fake butter" than women except maybe the third to the right who looks like they are trying real hard to pass as a man if they are not one😆.
To be honest though, I think reason they look the way they do currently has more to do with timing. My guess these are actually the male guard sculpts with headswaps to make them look more "Female" for womens day cause why not which is fine for now I guess, that said I do think they could put more effort into them later on and should if they plan on eventual plastic😉.
@Mark Dewis if they are going to be realisticly dressed....Then they shouldn't do females in line infantry uniforms before WW1 at all IN THE FIRST PLACE🤣 (no arguments to the contrary here since we are not talking character sculpts of real historical women that crossdressed but something that could be an "army builder" in the unlikely event they got to plastic given the poses I am seeing😆).
Now if WA is going to go ahead and do women in pre 20th century soldier uniforms like they have here, then they have already broken the "be realisticly dress rule" and like pretty much anything "not real" they should be brave and just go full Hollywood/Japanime with them (or at least half Hollywood/Japanime 😉), particularly since it is a chance to do historical scale proportion female bodies in something other than civilian cloths, Fantasy armor or unrealistic bikini armor.
So with that out of the way let’s get down to brass tacks. This is likely going to sound a bit harsh but this meant to be constructive:
Despite questionable propaganda to the contrary, big bustlines are a real biological phenomena that happens all the time among women and military uniforms from the 18th-19th century would likely still show that off pretty clearly albeit not as sexily as a dress (I should know I have a sister who did marching band). So in a regment I would expect see some examples of that among other things and these just don't really show any biological difference from men in close up pics of the sculpts (not just in the bustline department). I can only guess how confused some war gamers would be if faced with these and told by thier opponet that the minis are women since they have big manly hands, no busts or hips to speak of and faces that mostly look just enough like "Fabio to Putian" mannish to not hit the mark (if the heads are what you are going to use to tell the veiwer its female, you actually do need to make them "pretty and girlish" and not "plain/homely and mannish" at all cause the end result will look like a 28mm man otherwise if a head is all the sculpt has got making them female).
Not to mention argueable things like historical height diffrences between men and women which after long hard look does not seem to be there (those muskets should probably look a good deal longer next women of the timeframe than they do next to men, like anime weapon longer almost).
Also let’s be honest, in real life if there had been a publicly known "all female fighting force" even in a small regiment/unite they would likely not be wearing men’s uniforms at all but women’s uniform or "men's uniforms" that would be heavily modifed to fit women and be respectable to the soicial norms of the time to the point that they are womens uniforms. (Soldiers had to live in their uniforms back then so of course they got tailored one way or the other, they would likely be getting repaired and modified all the time by the soldiers themselves if nothing else).
What that means is if they are wearing "women’s uniforms" they would most likely have skirts given the timeframe, not pants and there is NO practical reason why they would have pants over skirts since we have scots recorded as wearing kilts,etc. So any argument for white western European girls dressed in uniform pants is historical and culturally faulty at best or an argument for crossdressing in a time period were it was frowned on HEAVILY by society, so they both kind of seem like epic 🤡 arguments with regards to a female guard unite that would be advertised as such publicly in the time of. Now there is a third reason to do "pre-20th century uniform girls pants", but that is "cheesecake reasons" and really not what I am seeing with these sculpts.
Literally the only "good" non-cheesecakey reason I can see to do them into plastic currently is if WA is trying really hard to reproduce the look of some work of visual media I have never seen or heard of with a 18th-19th century style soldier girl force in pants cause the person in charge of that other original media work either didn't want long skirts (maybe for some artistic reason) did not really read up on the cultures they were trying to emulate in thier story, or it was a British comedy about an all women reenactor club😆.
-
Thank you, Soldier, for your technical and very clear answer. I appreciate. The slang expression is clear too : "Tu te débrouilles" or "Tu fais avec, et tu la fermes" (You deal with and you shut up).
Interesting and relevant thoughts from you, Brian. I'm pretty much on the same line.
Izan ontsa.
-
@Pierre Lerdou-Udoy
You're very welcome.
@Brian Van De Walker
Reference:
Oh the program existed and I'm sure some armor was manufactured. I'm saying it's rarer than hens teeth on the ground. I've never met a single female Soldier who was issued it.
Reference:
The article is referring the universally issued MICH/ACH helmet. It is cut higher in the back to facilitate the shooting in the prone while wearing collared body armor. It would ALSO facilitate shooting while prone with a bun.
Of course there is no free lunch. A great deal more of the rear of the skull is now exposed.
Reference:
The referenced gaps are a problem due to shrapnel, either from indirect fire or IEDs, mines, etc. Snipers don't worry about gaps in the armor as the soft armor will not stop rifle rounds.
Reference:
That seems unlikely. The male ACU pants are cut considerably roomier in the crotch. The female variant much tighter.
Probably some female Soldiers were getting rubbed on the inner thigh by the lower crotch of male pants on long marches. Males are not necessarily immune to this either. Some Soldiers wear spandex shorts or use body glide on the thighs before long marches.
-
I think it can be summed up: If one can't tell they are female miniatures than there is zero point in making female miniatures.
-
Female miniatures I would 100% want.... I've had the pleasure and privilege of working with a few of these gals over the years and they are total badasses 😍
-
@Bill Thomas
IDF females would be an excellent release. I think the Ukrainian troops will probably fill the General Accoutrements (Now more or less anything that doesn't fit the other periods) for this month.
I imagine WGA will revisit the theme of "Females" again and again though. Way too rich a vein not to mine more.
-
Sneak Peaks:
The female Common Wealth troops should be awesome. Hopefully they get pants and kit.
WGA is probably leveraging the research they did for the upcoming Early War British kit. If the kit is done right (seperate chest gas mask and entrenching tools) the "Early" war kit will also be ideal for representing Common Wealth and Polish troops fighting in Italy.
-
@JTam Hmm, well that would makes more sense. It was late and I only scanned the article I referanced and could have misread "shrapnel" for "sniper" in that section and it being shrapnel would make more sense so I rechecked the artcle. No it said "sniper" Plus given the context either the npr journalist botched it real hard (very possible) or those Afgahns and insurgents are much better and more opportunistic marksmen than you give them credit for (also very possible). Here is the quote:
"This isn't just a matter of comfort. Duckworth said she has talked with a former combat doctor who had treated cases where gaping, ill-fitting armor gave snipers a clean shot. "
As for your experanice on the armor, which branch where you in and when? cuase it was likely not that heavily deployed in the recent "War on Terror/Iraq war" theaters (still in testing stages) and the air force seemed to be the one getting the lion's share of the new body armor to start with, on the other hand I doubt the Marines saw much of it beyond rumors and the same fluff news pieces I came across.
-
@Brian Van De Walker
Reference:
NPR doesn't know its a*s from a hole in the ground about the military or combat.
From the above quote neither does the surgeon (about combat) who probably was dozens/hundreds of miles/possibly a continent away from actual combat. All credit to him for what he does/his medical knowledge.
Reference:
US Army Infantry, 1993 to nowish.
Part of that time was as a Squad Leader and then PSG in a Scout/Sniper Platoon. A sniper does not wait around for a gap to appear in the armor before shooting. That's some Hollywood sh*t. If a casualty was brought in shot under the armpit that was bad luck, not the act of a super sniper. (Although again, hitting a gap in the armor doesn't really matter as even 7.62x39 will punch through the soft armor on the side of the torso).
-
As of 5 April 23:
I believe all of the above kits have been previewed at least. Except perhaps the Amazons. Curious how they will be different from the female Hoplites.
There are still a kit or two unreleased from February as well:
https://wargamesatlantic.com/community/xenforum/topic/85010/2023-february-digital-releases
-
Pretty sure the Mythradic Followers have been abandoned, alo g with the Spanish from January. Hopefully we'll see them some day.
The quality if this month was top notch, but Abita disappointing that we didn't get half the sets in the month. Still I got more Rebel Yell, so I'm happy with it.
-
@Red Bee
I believe we will still get the Mithradic followers. Without it there is no entry for "Decline and Fall" for February. Also, they usually announce when the month is done.
I have pretty much given up hope on the promised bonus multipart WW2 set for February.
What was the Spanish thing for January? I don't remember that.
-
@Red Bee
Ah, the Spanish Guerillas.
WGA should really stop promising these bonus sets and then not delivering. The obvious solution is to stop promising bonus sets. If you promise and fail that leads to disappointment. If a bonus set pops out of nowhere then that just generates good will.
-
@Red Bee
Reference: Mithradic followers for FEB being abandoned.
Well at this point I guess you were right and I was wrong.
-
As of 24 April 2023:
-
To close this out:
Sidenote: The female Hoplites were worth the wait. Superb miniatures.
Please login to reply this topic!
Search
Latest topics
Latest posts
Forum statistics
- Page views (24h):
- 1,020
- Page views (30d):
- 33,336
- Topics:
- 938
- Posts:
- 15,285
- Members:
- 1,852
Newest members
Most liked authors
-
JTam
6,249 -
William Redford
2,468 -
Geoff Maybury
2,443 -
Grumpy Gnome
1,883 -
Mark Dewis
1,775
