Return to Website

HaT Forum

A forum to discuss HaT products, ETS, uniformology, modeling, painting, and other essentials associated with HaT products.

HaT Forum
This Forum is Locked
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

The early war Brits look great, but the Yanks could use just a few tweaks. Might I suggest the occasional backpack. One of the figures needs either a Thompson SMG or M3 grease gun. Finally, if a GI's best fiend is his rifle, the guy throwing the grenade should have one, either slung across his back or in his other mit.

Otherwise both are great looking sets which I look forward to buying.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

R. Martin
The early war Brits look great, but the Yanks could use just a few tweaks. Might I suggest the occasional backpack. One of the figures needs either a Thompson SMG or M3 grease gun. Finally, if a GI's best fiend is his rifle, the guy throwing the grenade should have one, either slung across his back or in his other mit.

Otherwise both are great looking sets which I look forward to buying.


+1 to everything he said ;)

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

At least - early war BEF. Great hole in war. 4 figures from Zvezda are too little. Second - recon squad have wrong rigles.
I think the figures with Thompson is worth to release too. Mayby in command/support set [officer, light mortar (because A-T rifle is)]
US GIs are fine too - in shirts only. 8th pose NCO with smg please.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Some figures carrying supplies, guards etc. Forage caps as alternative heads. Stretcher parties. Radio operator.

Or maybe these belong to "behind the lines" sets.


Heads look a little large on the US figures.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Don't know what to say about the Brits, but for the Yanks, I like the mix right now, but if I would add something, it would be to fill voids in this scale with other manufacturers, so I agree with what has been suggested:

radio operator

http://imgs.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/parenting/2010/04/27/army_radio540x361.JPG

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-g1D7V1Mr08E/VFzsWEfaibI/AAAAAAAAWLw/qE5lzkfEqz8/s1600/Ideal%2BGI%2B8a%2B550.jpg

Stretcher bearers

http://www.marxwildwest.com/military/54%20stretcher%20team.jpg

carrying ammo or supplies (real useful)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CMwHkcZpEps/Us12qN-6ViI/AAAAAAAAAVI/1PsO4KppSYw/s1600/marxmarinesmgteam.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cmpqszPHa8s/Us2x312-R-I/AAAAAAAAAVY/-NwNkPbzspc/s1600/marxmarinesmgteamII.jpg

Marching

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/39/8c/a5/398ca5522ec760252c9a3632f285f861.jpg




Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

The BEF set does indeed fill in a massive hole in WW2 modelling market. There are early WW2 1/72 British tank finally appearing thanks to S Models and PSC so 1939-41 can be better covered.

I am sure that the BEF 1940 set will prove to be a good seller and suggests that HaT needs to be forward thinking and provide a heavy weapons set - MkI Bren gun (min 2 crew!), Boyd anti tank gun, mortars, Vickers (please no kneeing gunners please).

As the master is ready, it is time to get on with the production to get it ready for Christmas market.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

RCD
There are early WW2 1/72 British tank finally appearing thanks to S Models and PSC so 1939-41 can be better covered.

I am sure that the BEF 1940 set will prove to be a good seller and suggests that HaT needs to be forward thinking and provide a heavy weapons set - MkI Bren gun (min 2 crew!), Boys anti tank gun, mortars, Vickers (please no kneeing gunners please).

I agree, those are great tanks. A real leap forward for early WW2!

I guess you're saying the current 8227 WW2 British Mortars and 8228 WW2 British Machine Guns would not work for the BEF? Not sure how likely it is that we'll get another set of support weapons, though.

But it never hurts to ask!

I agree that the US Infantry heads are a little large. They tend toward some metal figures (I call them Hobbits).

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Grumble
RCD
There are early WW2 1/72 British tank finally appearing thanks to S Models and PSC so 1939-41 can be better covered.

I am sure that the BEF 1940 set will prove to be a good seller and suggests that HaT needs to be forward thinking and provide a heavy weapons set - MkI Bren gun (min 2 crew!), Boys anti tank gun, mortars, Vickers (please no kneeing gunners please).

I agree, those are great tanks. A real leap forward for early WW2!

I guess you're saying the current 8227 WW2 British Mortars and 8228 WW2 British Machine Guns would not work for the BEF? Not sure how likely it is that we'll get another set of support weapons, though.

But it never hurts to ask!

I agree that the US Infantry heads are a little large. They tend toward some metal figures (I call them Hobbits).
.....between Zvezda and Hat, heavy weapons are covered, the big gap.....infantry

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

I have all the Zvezda BEF sets and think these sets are very good and paint up well. If you have not got the 2pdr its a cracking little model and only £2-99. Likewise I have HaTs British late war motars and heavy weapons.The Zvezda also are 25mm with another 1mm for the bases so are they compatable with the HaT BEF 1940 infantry?

The reason I suggest that a heavy weapons sets is also required is because Zvezda never finished the British 1940 range. There are no bren gun with crew or Boyd anti tank guns etc. Actually HaT also miss out the crews for the Boyds and Brens!
The difference between early and late war British are the respirators positioned on the chest in the alert position, and gas capes rolled on the pack (Mustard gas attacks being expected - both sides did have stockpiles of these chemicals!). Also the packs are much more solid in the early period.

The HaT late British are good sets (when you can get hold of them especially the tank riders!) but they miss these important pieces of equipment.

I would argue that just producing Union troops for the ACW and saying you can paint them grey for the Confederates (yes I did this as a child with Airfix products) is not correct. Likewise producing one set of Germans for the whole war would be treated with total distain and would probably put Goebbels Miniatures out of business!

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Not arguing any of that, just that I have waited long enough and would like them sooner rather than later, if Hat make a heavy weapons set, I will buy a box or two, as I would for a long list of other WW2 British subjects too.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

I totally agree with your arguement that this set needs to appear asap. I am sure that it is a finacially sound project which has a great sales potential.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Both green or khaki plastics. Agree about some unusual like command, stretches,e.t.

Best regards

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Hi
What I really need for US soldier in Europe i 1944 is marching poses.

There are a lot of photo with column of GI advancing one column in each side of a road and wee need set with only marching poses...

Ammo bearer are also welcome.

Best

Pierre

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

On a broader theme I was wondering about the viability of HaT producing sets along the lines of the old Zvezda format i. e. 3 sprues of "rank and file" figures and one "command" sprue with officer, musicians, standard, radio operator in modern sets and so forth.

I'm guessing that it is just too expensive in that you're effectively producing two sets, but would people prefer to buy in this format, particularly for 20th century armies, or always have separate command sets?

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

I agree its a good way other than separate sets,officer,sergeant,radio operator,medicalx2,mp,ammo or supply carrier x2,mechanic or cook or reading or on bike,or playing cards,a fat guy

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Yes it was magnificent format of old Zvezda - 3 normal and 1 command sprue.
Unfortunatelly with MAC format - is a problem what to do with 3rd and 4th same command figures.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

don't forget to add a 'berserker" figure either a Brit standing with a cradled Lewis gun or a US with a 30cal air cooled firing from the hip... need to include the dramatic last stand figure!


Tim

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

In my opinion, it's better to have four similar sprues. For wargames, there are so many variations in the rules that some may require more and some may require fewer command figures. For example, when I base WW2 figures for Command Decision, I include three infantry figures per stand -- that represents a platoon. (And yes, I do realize that the CD standard is 2 per stand, but I started this way decades ago and there you have it!)

This means that for a standard British or German or US battalion, I need 3 x 3 x 3 = 27 or 3 x 3 x 4 = 36 infantry figures and only one officer and one radio for the battalion command. So I'd rather have the flexibility of deciding how many grunts or Tommies I'm going to buy versus being forced to pay for lots of extra command and support figures each time I buy a box.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Grumble
In my opinion, it's better to have four similar sprues. For wargames, there are so many variations in the rules that some may require more and some may require fewer command figures. For example, when I base WW2 figures for Command Decision, I include three infantry figures per stand -- that represents a platoon. (And yes, I do realize that the CD standard is 2 per stand, but I started this way decades ago and there you have it!)

This means that for a standard British or German or US battalion, I need 3 x 3 x 3 = 27 or 3 x 3 x 4 = 36 infantry figures and only one officer and one radio for the battalion command. So I'd rather have the flexibility of deciding how many grunts or Tommies I'm going to buy versus being forced to pay for lots of extra command and support figures each time I buy a box.


I also use 3 to the base, following the old McCoy Standard Units practice. They also used 2; I just think 3 look better, as long as the base fits in the back of a standard truck or halftrack. Usually I use a standing man in the middle flanked by two kneeling, all three shooting. That way they look balanced. Unfortunately the sets I've bought usually have more standing, so I either have a kneeling man in the center, or odd poses on the ends, which look lopsided. When I run out of shooting riflemen, I try to use complementary poses, as long as they fit the bases. This works out.

As for the figures HaT is offering: The Americans don't look so bad. Their heads actually are about right, it's the helmets which look oversized. Looking at period photos, I'm struck by how large the helmets look on many GIs. Worn with a tilt, it gives them a cocky, rakish look that appears to have been popular. I've seen other photos where the helmets look smaller. I suspect with many companies turning out millions of helmets in a relatively short time, exact sizing wasn't a priority and some lots were larger or smaller than others. So i don't mind the heads; they may actually be more in scale than they look.

More important is that if this represents a full squad, there should be a sergeant with Tommy gun or M3 grease gun, and a second BAR man. Many squads added a second BAR in the field; some even had three, and everyone carried a few extra magazines to keep them shooting. Another man needed is a radioman and assistant with heavy backpack radio, and/or a man with walkie-talkie.

The selection of poses are excellent; even men in similar poses look different, giving them all an individual look. The style is solid, giving hem an air of strong determination. In view of some complaints on another thread, note that while they are in action poses, not one is swinging a clubbed rifle!

I like these guys. I already have a ton of 1/72 Americans, but I wouldn't mind getting some of these, to make units of their own and to mix with other odd figures to increase their variety.

Bill

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Bill Guiroff

I also use 3 to the base, following the old McCoy Standard Units practice.

Usually I use a standing man in the middle flanked by two kneeling, all three shooting. That way they look balanced.

Bill


McCoy definitely influenced my choice, which was confirmed by an article on tabletop games way back in the early 1970's in *Strategy and Tactics* magazine.

I place two riflemen forward and one back, with the two forward either firing or in some aggressive pose, and the back one slightly less so, as if in reserve.

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Grumble
Bill Guiroff

I also use 3 to the base, following the old McCoy Standard Units practice.

Usually I use a standing man in the middle flanked by two kneeling, all three shooting. That way they look balanced.

Bill


McCoy definitely influenced my choice, which was confirmed by an article on tabletop games way back in the early 1970's in *Strategy and Tactics* magazine.

I place two riflemen forward and one back, with the two forward either firing or in some aggressive pose, and the back one slightly less so, as if in reserve.


I base them 3 abreast, in line as there's not enough room for them otherwise, unless forced by poses. Depends on the figure. Following the examples in the old 'Wargamer's Digest' articles, i cut my bases to fit three in a vehicle for infantry, or two with a bazooka or light machine gun; two for tripod-mounted machine guns or mortars if truck-borne. American halftracks have one mortar each, as do weapons carriers. Artillery bases are cut to fit inside their trucks, with half the crew on a separate piece that fits onto the other. When dismounted the crew stands are placed on either side of the trail, be it single or fixed in the towing position. If it has openable split trails the crews are set between them directly behind.

When I started out I had a huge number of infantry figures, and a lot of guns, but no mortars, bazookas or tripod-mounted machine guns, and few if any light machine guns. So I took suitably-posed infantry melee figures and converted them. The much-maligned man swinging a clubbed rifle makes an ideal mortar loader, while a kneeling rifleman with rifle replaced by a long, thin tube of rolled paper makes a satisfactory bazooka for any army. The last also makes a good heavy machine gunner, especially if a torso firing at the waist with weapon removed is swapped onto the kneeling legs. The last makes a good bazooka loader, or a gunner for an antitank gun.

An officer waving one hand with pistol in the other makes an excellent second mortar man with the pistol removed. Melee figures advancing or charging with rifles held across their bodies make good artillery crews.

For more recent armies, the kneeling rifleman gets a shorter tube, representing a LAW launcher. The antitank gun is replaced by a crew-served ATGM, with kneeling or prone crew converted from crawling or shooting. The standing rifleman with a longer tube makes a good shoulder-fired SAM man.

This works with any period. I made my French 75s from Airfix 3-inch ordnance rifles, and the crews were converted from surplus infantry figures, the assorted mixed poses giving the battery a very energetic look. The trails fit nicely between the figures, hiding the lack of seats, and fit neatly atop towing trucks which started out as die-cast trucks from one of the 'Indiana Jones' movies, which have a generic look nicely suitable for both World Wars and in between(very useful since I don't have limbers for horse towing!)

Bill

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Those Indiana Jones trucks are great!

Re: Give us your input on the makeup of the WW2 British Infantry or US GI sets!

Grumble
Those Indiana Jones trucks are great!


They sure are! Unfortunately the stores around here never had too many. I was able to buy enough to motorize my French artillery, though, before they were discontinued. All I needed to do was add wire loops for towhooks and give them a camouflage paint scheme. They work good.

Bill