Blog post on the Spit -
http://twtrb.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/...ire-mk-ii.html
Blog post on the Spit -
http://twtrb.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/...ire-mk-ii.html
So what type of plastic do Warlord intend to do these in - rigid or flexible?
Run for your life - there are stupid people everywhere!
Hmmm... Do I see a repeat of poor research?
This image is from Ken's blog post:
I think I can see cannon blisters (circles) on this wing, where there shouldn't be any blisters. Also, there are only three access panels for the MGs, where there should be four (arrows point out where there should be two rectangles, not one).
PS: the wing isn't right for a few more panel lines, now that I'm trying to figure out what they've done. Small thing, really, but not correct.
This image from the examination of the Nexus and Ares Mk I and II Spitfires:
From this thread: Spitfire - Wings of War vs Wings of GLory
Both companies put cannon blisters on the 'A' wing, which shouldn't have been there.
It appears that Warlord attempted to put MG access panels on the wing, but perhaps scale made putting all four a bit crowded. The wing, if it does have a blister as indicated by the circle, would be a mix of a type 'A' and type 'C' wing, that never existed. So, as with Nexus/Ares models, all that would be needed for a Mk V would be to fill in the panel lines for the inner MG access, and put brass rod (or sprue) cannons on the leading edges.
Last edited by OldGuy59; 08-27-2017 at 07:53.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
Well they are pre-production models, with luck they may have corrected them by the time they get released, if not maybe a little corrective surgery might do the trick ? Thanks for showing them off, they might be an option for WGS players even if they don't like the look of BRS, especially if they start churning out some wish list favourites.
"He is wise who watches"
Carl if it ANGLES 20 (A&A) I know what you mean. I have the game but much prefer WoG. It reminded me of Check Your Six or Squadrons which are both hex based.
I also have a number of planes but like WoG better and the planes are a softer material. A number of them have bent wings because of that. Also as with War@ Sea they stopped after the 2nd set they put out.
Hmmm... Better look again at the other planes.
Appears to me that the Bf-109 has 'K' wing panels, not 'E' wing panels:
The tips look OK, though, even if the leading edge slats are not all the way to the tips.
Found a really nice page for version drawings: www.hobbymex.com - Bf-109 Drawings F-K
Last edited by OldGuy59; 08-28-2017 at 12:14.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
Last edited by PilGrim; 08-28-2017 at 13:38.
I'm going to let a PTO expert jump into the discussion on versions of Zeros. Same for the Russian Front, as I haven't done many cards for the Russians, either.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
Well there is a lot of heated disscussion going on, but to be fair each to their own. Me I am staying with ARES as I have not come across a better game system (that includes models rules ect) and BRS does not measure up. That is my view.
Hi Doug - Fair enough, and each to their own. I only got "vexed" when there were some rather offhand and IMHO uninformed comments made earlier. Anyway that boat has sailed.
At the moment more concerned at the errors the guys here are pointing out - with varying degrees of glee :-) in the prototypes. We all are sharing pretty much the same model pool and they should be interchangeable from system to system, so it is in everyone's best interest that we get some nice, reasonably costed 1:200 toys. The problem is the more we look at these the more question marks are being raised. I'm not sure how welcome my comments are going to be at Warlord, but I don't work for them and won't buff a product I don't think is up to scratch to stay in favour. I'm a bloody minded person, as can probably be seen from my earlier comments and that works both ways.
Which leads to an interesting point - how good does a model have to be to be good enough? On one side we have the "that looks about right" (TLAR) and at the other end of the scale there are "rivet counters" (RC). So far these models are falling firmly in the TLAR side of the scale. Of course you can never totally please the RCs but is that an excuse to produce inaccurate models? Using these as an example I'm happy to write off the canopy issue with the 109 as that is probably the result of the production method tolerances, but the wing panel issue is just poor research. I wonder what % of the market these issues matter to?
I feel a poll coming on
I'm remembering we did one a couple years back; or just a thread
For me, I can accept a few minor glitches at this scale and purpose; the Bf-109k was a bit much, esp. after it seemed that it was right in pre-production. And we won't mention the T****h***d in WGF
I think when we're counting panels on a 1/200 model for gaming, it's too far. Others feel differently, and that's fine.
Karl
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
Yes The T**pe H***d was something of a low point
edit - no with some afterthought the "Belgian" RE8 is the hands down winner. Luckily there are so few Belgians it didn't seem to matter
At least I think so, however who knows what will come?
Last edited by PilGrim; 08-29-2017 at 03:35.
Mike
"Flying is learning to throw yourself at the ground and miss" Douglas Adams
"Wings of Glory won't skin your elbows and knees while practicing." OldGuy59
Hi the RE8 did not get published like this
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/alb...hmentid=101556
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/alb...hmentid=101555
And to show here is one next to a Shapeways
http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/alb...hmentid=101554
Dont know about sales but I for one have never used a Triplane in action, except Shapeways or my repaired Ares version, this was the one aircraft I was really looking forward to and initial pictures of the prototype looked perfect, then it was released and I been anti ever since, no I will not let it go
To get back to the topic of BRS, not too sure about this one, the demo I saw at Partizan 2 caught my attention, as mentioned previously I did like the fact that when you buy a sqn pack, it is a sqn pack and comes with a number of models, I did not get chance to look closely at the models so again cannot comment nor did I get to have a go due to our own Sails of Glory Demo.
I would like to have a go to compare to WGS and to check out the gameplay, it will be good to get another source of models and if sales goes well we may get some German bombers , Do17 and Ju88 long before Ares publish them so it cant be that bad, plus it should be pretty simple to convert between the two systems so you can choose your own preference.
Last edited by Boney10; 08-30-2017 at 02:27.
As I said before, I think the rules are very sound, but in deference to what others here have said, they are very different in approach to WGS. Although I think much of the criticism comes from a lack of experience and not getting the full picture of how they work, it is undeniable that they simplify the precise planning and manoeuvring element that you can get with WGS so if that's your thing, BRS may not be. I get the impression the rules are very well thought through, which is no surprise as Andy Chambers has been doing this sort of thing for a long time. I also get the impression the rules are something of a pet project for him that he's managed to get into production rather than a corporate suit master plan.
I think it will succeed and we will see more models in due course, and I would expect the Do17 & Blenheim will probably be around quite early as these are part of the core game. I know they are planning a Hurricane, Fw190 and iirc P47 as the second set of releases but it will depend on how the game takes off.
It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus
More BoB is enough of a deal killer for me. From my perspective on the West Coast of the USA BoB was a skirmish before the real war began on December 7, 1941. Before you throw boots at my head please realize I am joking.
I am not buying into BRS but am familiar with Warlord games and am in the process of building USMC and Japanese forces from their Blot Action Line. The quality of the molds and options for decking out the troops is amazing for the price. Warlord offers high quality miniatures and produce them in quantities sufficient to support a thriving player base. If you cannot find a particular model at your FLGS store then you can order up what you need right from their web store. They throw out scenario themes, such as summer tank battles, and then put a dozen of their tank types on sale at 25% off. Overall Warlord's engagement with the community is high.
Why am I getting into all of this? From a business perspective it doesn't matter if BRS has better or worse models because Warlord offers excellent product so they will be good enough. It doesn't matter if the rules are better or worse than WGS as long as people like their rules. Historic accuracy is always going to be a moving target in the gaming world (and real world) of differing perspectives, alternate facts, and the buyer's desire to have what they want when they want it! What really matters in the BRS vs WGS competition is who engages the potential customer base more effectively. Riddle me this Batman: Which product line BRS or WGS will be the first to release the iconic Corsair?
Whatever looks like Baa Baa Black Sheep because that is what people want, even though that show is terribly inaccurate.
If BRS is successful everyone except Ares will benefit. Well, people who want pre-painted minis will also be boned by Ares discontinuing production, so let's hope that does not happen.
That was my conclusion.Originally Posted by Jager
I don't think that is going to happen, or rather the ongoing success of WGS has little to do with BRS. I think we forget that Ares don't base their releases on anything to do with the historical wargames market. They're a board games company who happen to produce a board game that wargamers have "adopted". If you need any reassurance just look at their release schedule - there is no suggestion of any real coordinated release plan. We already have a wide selection of other games and model producers and so far that hasn't seemingly impacted on Ares decision making.
So just to sum up, and concentrating on just the models and details
Me109 - Cockpit frame "disappointing" and 109K wing panels not Es
Spitfire - Cannon bulges
Zero - no cannon and A2 panels
Yak - nothing reported
P51 Nothing reported
That seem about it?
Apologies for dredging up a thread several months dormant, but I'm curious if anyone has heard/seen anything else regarding the minis attached to this game? The release date draws nigh... and I'm not opposed to some kind of advantaged/disadvantaged mechanic in air combat games.
Either way, fascinating discussion.
I asked my FLGS today and the distributor still does not have a release date. On the website Warlord promises a December delivery of pre-orders and general release one month later. So probably by the end of February at the latest.
I do not need any more BoB airplanes included in the BRS starter box since I have x3 original Spits, x2 additional from the new set. etc. so I passed on the pre-order. For me there are no 'must have' needs regarding the initial airplanes but I have my eye on this product for future releases because Warlord will offer airplanes that the greatest number of people really want at a faster pace than Ares.
At the end of the day I have no interest in the BRS system and am not going to jump games. However, I may jump into more models depending on how long it takes Ares to produce the stuff I want.
Bookmarks