|
|
Post by loyalist on Aug 4, 2016 13:12:45 GMT
Last week I received my first order of S2G British tanks and cavalry. The 4 tanks are the transport variant and are beautifully detailed; they're the earlier version with more prominent print lines but I've decided not to try to sand them off due to potential for loss of other detail - the lines are not that prominent.
The tanks are fractionally taller than the plastic AQotMF Mk II, longer and narrower. The internal hull volume would be about the same. I really like the drawbridge style exit doors on the side; the metal castings are excellent. I plan to use them as heavy artillery towing vehicles for my BEF and Canadian forces, the premise being they were an early form of gasoline powered British tank in the developmental history of the Imperial tank and are still used when Cardigans are in short supply, as in the North American theatre. Some were sold to the Canadians.
The S2G tanks look great next to coil guns or heavy howitzers and could easily carry an entire gun crew. I hope S2G will sell enough tanks to make a wider bodied version for troop transports, as was discussed some months ago. The current version doesn't look big enough to carry a 10 man BEF squad (but neither does the Cardigan model). Another potential use is as armoured ambulances. The tow vehicles will be fitted with plastic tow hooks from AQotMF tank kits.
I did a test fit of a gun barrel from a MK II plastic kit and it looked impressive as well as tying the model into the AQotMF universe by having an identical gun. A model like that could represent Canadian arming of the British transport tank. These models are highly recommended.
The British lancers are also recommended. The horses have dynamic poses and the riders are well detailed, though smaller than expected. They are similar in size to FoW figures and a little small imo compared to the horses, which seem scale size compared to AQotMF infantry. I'd originally considered copying BEF or US infantry heads in resin and switching them with the cavalry heads, but when able to compare them directly the AQotMF heads are bigger, especially the BEF. All the cavalry have rifles in holsters behind the saddle.
I was initially concerned by the thin lance shafts, many of which had bent, but the metal is pliable and not brittle - they are easy to straighten. Of course they have no explosive devises attached and I don't think I'll bother to add any. The cavalry, including the sword and rifle armed version, have rolls or packs behind the riders and those could be considered to represent explosive packs. The lances and swords would be for use against lobototons during assaults.
I've mounted two 3-element units of lancers and a 3 man cavalry command unit I was able to order from S2G. Drew asked which figures I wanted and made up the pack. I'll be ordering 2-3 units of sword and rifle equipped cavalry, another command unit and possibly a 3rd lancer unit.
|
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 5, 2016 0:58:03 GMT
Excellent report on a great looking line from S2G. As you know, I've drawn up a complete backstory and line based on the their products. The above gives more detail and I intend to get at least two of each of the tanks and a full platoon of both British and Prussians for a King Germans Legion battalion. Hopefully I can get my order out to them by months end. Still paying off this computer sigh. In any case, look forward to getting more of these wonderful figures after my appetite has been stoked by the samples given out at the games at Historicon 2016.
|
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 5, 2016 1:13:00 GMT
A quick add on - it appears all of the infantry and cavalry figures have gloves on. I'm seriously thinking of giving my S2G 8th KGL unit Immune to Gas if this is the case - an enclosed suit with maybe some asbestos worked in. Would make them some of the most potent infantry/cavalry on the table! Even without an additional Armor point (for the asbestos weave), just the Gas Immune would be a big step - especially as we still don't have any 'Heavy Infantry' for the BEF.
|
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Aug 8, 2016 12:16:37 GMT
The British cavalry have what appear to be heavy gloves, also some body armour.
I forget to mention in the review that all the riders have a transverse step across the helmet. The step down from the front to back halves of the helmets is at most 1/4 mm high. Depending on the direction of lighting it can be noticeable and will definitely be after painting with highlighting. I removed all the ridges on the helmets with a fine Swiss file and careful scraping with the edge of a hobby knife blade. That took 1-2 minutes per rider but will improve th appearance of the figures when painted.
I'm about to order a few more cavalry units for a Canadian scouting force that will include some Rough Rider units and a unit of BEF armoured cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 8, 2016 12:21:20 GMT
Wonderful 'fix' thank you. I plan on getting my order out to them at months end as I'm still paying down the cost of this machine. As your going 'international' for figures, might I suggest Conquerors 'Terror' tank as an alternative to BEF armored cars. It has a unique look and would go well for a Canadian scout force. See my stats on it - it can mount the same 57 mm gun and has a mg as well. Alternatively you can have a longer range, less powerful, Hotchkiss 1.65" on it  |
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 8, 2016 12:36:59 GMT
Yeah, you might want to stick with the Defiant for its speed. The Terror just looks cool! |
|
|
|
Post by slave2gaming on Aug 8, 2016 22:22:46 GMT
Sorry, I missed this post. Work has been crazy with some fairly big multi-million trials on & im expected to work more & longer hours.
Thanks for the great review Loyalist, especially after the postal hassles. At the moment we have decided not to recast the tanks (I'd originally planned to), and will probably be looking at the weapons upgrades for the current hulls.
The larger hulled tanks may still be a little way off yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Aug 13, 2016 14:09:25 GMT
Yeah, you might want to stick with the Defiant for its speed. The Terror just looks cool! I've got a platoon of 10 Defiants, plus 6 Spectors to accompany the cavalry. The cavalry gas masks are most similar to the US/'Canadian' type, which is why I'm using them as a Canadian unit. Still waiting for the Blue Moon British WWI cavalry, which have been 'coming soon' for about a year. If the riders are bigger than those from S2G I may use copies of BEF heads for them. I ordered some packs of BM British officers and am using them for BEF command units. |
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 15, 2016 12:18:58 GMT
Nice Recon unit that !! Are you pointing the cavalry on USA model (35 +15 for explosives) or BEF model (55). Strange that the Brits don't have the explosions option. And if they dismount, they're the same as an infantry - you think one of them has a 1/2 pound coil gun! Always strange the cavalry - there's only six in a squad but become 15 or 10 infantry?? I agree, was very disappointed at Historicon 2016 that Old Glory hadn't done any of the new WW 1 (and others) figures yet. I was told that there was a production backup of some sort and its only a matter of time, so I keep checking the website. As you know, I've formulated an entire S2G force exclusive of the other USA/BEF forces and run a different sort of things for my Canadians. That Recon unit you have is coming in at 550 (Definants) + 330 (Spectors) for 880 points before any cavalry. Nice. Might I suggest a few rocket upgrades I've mentioned for the BEF to give those cars some real punch!? I look forward to seeing what you end up with and pictures of the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Aug 15, 2016 15:23:12 GMT
I'm going to use the US cavalry points as the lances aren't explosive equipped and are assumed to be for assault against 'soft' targets like lobototons (same for the riders with swords). I don't know why the BEF cavalry are 5 pts. more with explosive lances and don't have the rule book with me to check their stats. Do they have a better defense or armor value than the US cavalry?
I'm making each cavalry unit with 6 figures mounted 2 per element on 40x 45mm Renedra bases. However, I'll operate 3 units together for one cavalry 'platoon'. This will give 18 figures that when dismounted will be replaced by 15 US/'Canadian' infantry in 3 x 5-man elements. The other 3 riders will presumably have taken the horses and lances/swords to the rear. The 3-man cavalry command may stay mounted for better maneuverability or be replaced by a 3-man infantry HQ on the same size base.
I plan to have at least 2 cavalry platoons, one with lances and one with swords, and each with a mounted command unit. I don't like the rule preventing the cavalry (or Rough Riders) from remounting again and may use a house rule that they can.
|
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 16, 2016 11:00:51 GMT
Ack, good one with the horse holders - totally forgot about that aspect of 'mounted infantry'; and here I made such an issue of it with my Aussie Light Horse unit. What I was trying to say is that the BEF cavalry doesn't have an option for "explosives" like the US cavalry does. The explosive option gives you a +3 Power assault vs the normal +2 grenade one. Actually makes the cavalry worth having, especially if you can surprise the Martians with them. So why are BEF costed at 55 points! Fancy uniforms?? Snobbery??
Should dismounted cavalry have a blip counter like infantry? Thank for reminding me about a little project I'd wanted to do with the French Foreign Legion TO&E - adding dismounted cavalry to the mix. And yes, I firmly believe that cavalry sound be able to remount; especially if being used in a recon mode - spot the enemy advance and get the heck back to you unit to report!
|
|
|
|
Post by loyalist on Aug 16, 2016 21:55:18 GMT
Just got home from the woods and checked the rules. The BEF cavalry have better armour (5 vs 4) than the US, but cost 20 pts. more than grenade equipped US cavalry (55 vs 35 pts). I don't think +1 armour would cost 20 points, when US cavalry pay +15 points to replace grenades with explosives.
However, lance equipped BEF cavalry in the BEF rules expansion have the same stats as the BEF cavalry in the rule book but have 'explosive adhesive lances' (+3 power) for only 5 more points (60).
The explosive lance equipped BEF cavalry end up costing 10 points more than the explosive equipped US cavalry. Whether or not the better BEF armour is worth 10 points is unclear.
|
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 17, 2016 12:59:29 GMT
Yep, I agree that is silly. Must be those uniforms?? I suppose that could be a 'change' for the LR book. Or maybe an optional. I see no reason not to make a change to the points for BEF cavalry. Especially as (outside of S2G) there isn't any figures for BEF style models - I suppose you could/should use the expansion cavalry for American units. This said here is what I purpose to 'fix' this. I also can't help but notice that BEF Cavalry is no where to be found in the 1911 TO&E of either Mobile Strike or Tank regiments.
Rule book version/
BEF Cavalry: 3 element @55 points. Speed 8" Defense 6 Armor 5 Special: Mounted
Rifle: Range 15" - Power (Rate of Fire 1) Special: n/a
Grenade: Range Assault +2 Power
BEF Cavalry: 3 elements @55 points. Speed 8" Defense 6 Armor 5 Special: Mounted; Courageous; Fire from Saddle; Ambush.
Mars Pattern Rifle: Range 15" +1 Power (Rate of Fire 1) Special: n/a
Grenade: Range Assault +2 Power
@ +5 Points - Explosives : Range Assault +3 Power Special: either lance or thrown saddle bag.
Comments: Each element is 2 figures. Unit can be represented as blips with all the rules for them (note lower movement). Unit may also perform Ambushes per the rules.
Okay this is a radical change so I'll explain my reasoning. First there is the need to justify the higher cost of BEF basic points. By simply adding Courageous and a 'Mars' Rifle to the unit with a 'Fire from Saddle' rule, the BEF cavalry unit becomes worth the 55 points on its own. Then you add the Explosives at 5 points giving the unit a 60 point total. This puts them on par with the Assault Squad with the 'bonus' of having three elements vs two. So the BEF cavalry doesn't need a dismount/remount rule as the blip/ambush rule assumes a dismounted status for those functions. In all cases, the cavalry unit will prefer a mounted status. Of coarse the draw back is when mounted its subject to a host of Difficult Terrain movement problems and its definitely not preferred over Assault Infantry for holding trenches or towns/cities. I welcome more discussion on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by seydlitz on Aug 17, 2016 23:31:48 GMT
The Brits cost more due to VAT or import taxes. Have you seen the mess bill requirements for a Victorian era cavalry officer?
|
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Aug 18, 2016 10:58:37 GMT
LoL brilliant point sir!
|
|
