Dixon Miniatures and Front Rank

A section devoted to questions and answers for this period.
Post Reply
Captain of Dragoons
Major General
Major General
Posts: 624
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:18 am
Location: Trenton, Ontario, Canada

Dixon Miniatures and Front Rank

Post by Captain of Dragoons » Tue Oct 25, 2005 6:15 pm

Has anybody tried mixing Dixon Grand Alliance with Front Rank WSS?

Would they look good in the same unit or is the difference in size to much. Would they be ok on the same table top if Dixon was in all dixon units and Front Rank was in all the same unit.

Thamks,

Ed
Captain of Dragoons
User avatar
barr7430
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5905
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: EK,Scotland
Contact:

Post by barr7430 » Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:02 am

Ed this is one mix I wouldn't recommend for the following reasons:

1. Anatomy/design is VERY different also the FR figures are significantly bigger than any others.

2. Clothing and equipment styles are just a little bit too far apart.


I think having units of each in the same army is fine. Don't worry about the tricornes v felt hats argument. I have banged on about that one ad nauseum. :roll: :roll: :roll:

B
"If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you are probably right"

Henry Ford
Captain of Dragoons
Major General
Major General
Posts: 624
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:18 am
Location: Trenton, Ontario, Canada

Post by Captain of Dragoons » Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:44 pm

Hello Barry and other forum members,

When you say that Front Rank are bigger, do you mean height wise or thickness.

What I have to decide is either to go with Front Rank or Dixon. Dixon has the advantage because there is a store here in Canada I can order them from. If I went with Front Rank I would have to order from UK or USA which means here in Canada we are taxed to death.

As a newbie building his first army what would you recommend. Also history wise is there more actions to fight in the Grand Alliance period and/or William vrs James period comparied to the WSS. I have a basic knowledge or these two periods. I have read on Marlborough and Blenheim and of course the Boyne.

That's the two questions I face before I take the jump. Dixon or Front Rank and Grand Alliance or WSS.

When I first began to be interested in Wargaming I new it was going to be the Pike and Shot era. I was trying to decide between TYW and ECW and then I found your great website and ULB.

My wife is not happy with you (ha ha).

cheers from Canada,

Ed
Captain of Dragoons
User avatar
18th Century Guy
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
Posts: 493
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA U.S.A.
Contact:

Post by 18th Century Guy » Fri Oct 28, 2005 1:19 am

To be honest I love both FR and Dixon. If your going to focus more on the LOA/9 yrs war then I'd go with Dixon. They paint up oh so nice in not too much time either. Plus Dixon will have pikes while FR doesn't.

18th Century Guy
User avatar
barr7430
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5905
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: EK,Scotland
Contact:

Post by barr7430 » Fri Oct 28, 2005 3:31 pm

Greg's points are totally valid and now Ed, we're getting into the 'personal taste' issues. My opinion(and it is only that) is that the Dixons figures are preferable. Their cartoon-y anatomy lends itself well to a splendid paint job and I prefer the poses to those of the new Front Rank stuff. Front Rank are a first class manufacturer and the castings are always very high quality BUT, I am not a great lover of their stuff (particularly the SSW) For the following reasons:

1. I think the infantry poses(with the exceptions of personalities and officers) are too wooden and un natural.
2. I do not enjoy painting them as much as other ranges(particularly the faces)

When I said they were bigger I meant in all dimensions. A good comparison would be this: consider the average man to be say 5'7" (a Foundry or Dixons casting), well the Front Rank figure would look like a 6'2" American Football player beside him in proportion.


As to whether there is more scope in SSW or NYW well, the BIG FOUR : Blenheim, Oudenaarde, Ramillies and Malplaquet have been more or less done to death although there is a huge amount of other theatres and actions to cover. This period is only called the 'Marlburian Period' in the English speaking world and I think it is much more appropriate to refer to it as The War of the Spanish Succession. If you are not a huge devotee of Marlborough then I would probably recommend the NYW in preference. Why?

1.Big battles: Fleurus, Neerwinden(Landen), Walcourt,Steenkirk, Namur etc.
2.A French Army which is Hot to Trot with great commanders.
3.British Regiments with non standardised Colours(offering more variety)
4. Interesting subsidy troops
5. The 'bolt on' theatre of operations in Ireland
6. PIKES!

You can of course swap troops between both periods (only about 5 years between the end of one war and the beginning of the next - in fact it is almost like a soccer match with the first half NYW going to the French with a nice recovery by the Alliance in the second half - SSW!!! 8) )


Neither is mutually exclusive !

Enjoy, I have for nearly 15 years

B
"If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you are probably right"

Henry Ford
Captain of Dragoons
Major General
Major General
Posts: 624
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:18 am
Location: Trenton, Ontario, Canada

Post by Captain of Dragoons » Fri Oct 28, 2005 7:59 pm

Thanks for the insight Barry.

I can see where Marlborough's big four have been done to death. I also like that pike and shot combo.

cheers,

Ed
Captain of Dragoons
Post Reply