juggler69uk
Mongoose
BuShips said:
Indeed the A&A WW2 15 mm ground forces did vary somewhat, and the Aircraft were not even close
War at Sea
- Thread starter hyndridge
- Start date
Indeed the A&A WW2 15 mm ground forces did vary somewhat, and the Aircraft were not even close
I agree with your opinions, and also with DM's statements.Lowly Uhlan said:Fanaticus said:
A couple friends of mine bought some WaS booster packs and I was looking at them this weekend. The painted lines on the carriers and some other details were pretty nice. There was ship cammo too, which is nice because I hate painting cammo. But they're just too big IMO. I won't use or buy any (I might pick up some aircraft on the secondary market) but if someone doesn't want to paint or assemble minis they might be an option. As far as quality goes I've seen worse.
And yes, GHQ rules the naval minis world
But people are demanding more pictures of WaS, so afraid they are, so here are some more:
They look to me as if they would work just fine. The aircraft are double scale, like 1/800 or 1/900, correct? All in all, since measuring is to the model's center (or front funnel or to bridge etc.) on a decent size table (or floor) they should be very usable. Thanks for showing pics for those interested or even just curious. 
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
So what are we looking at here? Are those all War at Sea models, or a mix of ranges?
Lord David the Denied
Mongoose
Scale looks a bit crazy. Are those destroyers alongside the battleship in the middle of the photo?
Lord David the Denied said:
Let me give this a go (for recognition practice).
Top photo, above and to the left of Iowa class BB: U.S. Fletcher DD. Behind it I'm thinking U.S. Buckley class DE. Near side of Iowa and to the left: Atlanta class CL(AA). It's the first type, with 16 5" guns. Later versions removed the two beam mounts to add AA and save topweight. Behind Atlanta, maybe a German Narvik class DD. So 3 of the four "escorting" Iowa are DDs. Someone grade me, please. :wink:
All War at Sea... as I already told...Lord David the Denied said:
Planes are definitely - as stated as - off scale relating with the ships.
Scale in the ships is supposed to be consistent to 1:1800, but I'm not really sure of that.
Nevertheless, the relation between the different ships seem to be somewhat well represented, and also the visual representation of the ship itself.
For example, this issue relates me to the previous Panzerschiffe range image in this thread, supposedly a better range, when we can see a Fletcher DD which has NO resemblance with a true Fletcher DD... but in the WaS range thats ship is better represented.
I think that the color patterns used, not being uniform, can bring some level of visual confusion.
juggler69uk
Mongoose
You might well need a large table to game with the war at sea mini's
I realize this is an old thread.....just wondering how many are using WotC War at Sea models now?
It appears they meet some initial resistence when they were intially released for the old salts.. I was playing WaS before I came to VaS and I fully intend to use my WaS collection for VaS as I cannot justify building two collections.
There are now many more models available than when this thread was firts created and the quality is steadily improving. WoTC just released the 4th set of models yesterday June 8, 2010 bringing the total number of units to 204 which includes reprints or sister ships.
I just wish they made a line of WWI models that I could use with AoD so all my models would be consistent.
It appears they meet some initial resistence when they were intially released for the old salts.. I was playing WaS before I came to VaS and I fully intend to use my WaS collection for VaS as I cannot justify building two collections.
There are now many more models available than when this thread was firts created and the quality is steadily improving. WoTC just released the 4th set of models yesterday June 8, 2010 bringing the total number of units to 204 which includes reprints or sister ships.
I just wish they made a line of WWI models that I could use with AoD so all my models would be consistent.
Lincolnlog
Mongoose
I have a set of 1/2400 scale miniatures from multiple manufacturers. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. Whe W@S first came out I bought the first set, decided they were too large. But, they are nice miniatures.
Face it, some of us are just not artistically inclined. If you enjoy glueing 5"/38 gun turrets to your fingers, then you might like GHQ, which will still have to be primed and painted. Back when Superior was in business, I preferred them over GHQ (true they were not as detailed) because there were not tons of little parts.
I like the W@S models, they look nice, you don't have to paint or assemble them! This leaves more time to roll dice and generate scenarios. Another nie feature, is sine the W@S miniature are plastic they are not a fragile. I have also come to realize that the size difference is no so great as to be a true disability in playing. With 1/1800 scale ships, an 8 foot table still proveds more than adequate playing space.
I look forward to additional W@S releases. With the 4 out there already, the fleets are really starting to fill out. By in large, no-one needs more than fleet. The W@S miniatures work well. If you want to shoot holes in something, sink the rules/W@S game system.
I know Ray has taken his miniature to a Convention, and I have taken mine to game groups. And the W@S miniatures always draw a crowd. So they are popular not only with the owners, but with the general populace (spectators) as well. I would be curious if anyone has ever bought a copy of Victory at Sea after playing W@S miniatures. I did! 8)
The only thing that slightly annoys me is they take a ship that there were only 4 of. Make it a common, and then issue under 2 sets, so you end up with 12 models of a ship there were only 4 of. In the current set, my6 example is Witt de With. If it is a common and there were fewer than 6 in the class, I think there should only be one issue of that model.
Bob
Face it, some of us are just not artistically inclined. If you enjoy glueing 5"/38 gun turrets to your fingers, then you might like GHQ, which will still have to be primed and painted. Back when Superior was in business, I preferred them over GHQ (true they were not as detailed) because there were not tons of little parts.
I like the W@S models, they look nice, you don't have to paint or assemble them! This leaves more time to roll dice and generate scenarios. Another nie feature, is sine the W@S miniature are plastic they are not a fragile. I have also come to realize that the size difference is no so great as to be a true disability in playing. With 1/1800 scale ships, an 8 foot table still proveds more than adequate playing space.
I look forward to additional W@S releases. With the 4 out there already, the fleets are really starting to fill out. By in large, no-one needs more than fleet. The W@S miniatures work well. If you want to shoot holes in something, sink the rules/W@S game system.
I know Ray has taken his miniature to a Convention, and I have taken mine to game groups. And the W@S miniatures always draw a crowd. So they are popular not only with the owners, but with the general populace (spectators) as well. I would be curious if anyone has ever bought a copy of Victory at Sea after playing W@S miniatures. I did! 8)
The only thing that slightly annoys me is they take a ship that there were only 4 of. Make it a common, and then issue under 2 sets, so you end up with 12 models of a ship there were only 4 of. In the current set, my6 example is Witt de With. If it is a common and there were fewer than 6 in the class, I think there should only be one issue of that model.
Bob
Similar threads
