Celt Shield Question

[Jim]

G'day All,

I know that the idea of a forum is to express people opinions, but I am concerned about the absolute zeal some people approach a topic that is basically concerned with little plastic soldiers. I pray that you dont forget the lighter side of what we do. I understand that some people are more historically focused then others but sheeesh, documentary evidence! For Celts! Come on celts are scum - you cant trust them!

Just joking. Seriously though, have fun with it and dont let your “preference” lead you to condemning things out of hand.

Regards

Jim

[Leigh]

Loads of manufacturers sell separate shields anyway these days.

I think I can quite safely say that most wargamers (at least true wargamers, veiled insults regarding Warhammer players aside) have bought enough models of various makes to own their very own pile of spare shields from other collections.

I have to say, however, that I'm still a bit surprised by the decision not to include sufficient shields to give everybody one.

[Noble]

I think it's down to each player - I don't mind what others arm and use their models with - I have heard of people wanting to use their Roman Legionaires as Celts in plundered Roman equipment, and I don't mind people having their Celts running around entirely without shields, just swinging swords and severed heads.

But it's not the way I would want to build them - my way is wanting to build them as what I view as historically correct (in relation to known sources, scholarship and educated guesses), and with pack compositions like these I'm refused my way.

Again, while I don't mind more casually interested people building loosely historically associated armies, with a pinch or two of 'cool' (WAB is the perfect system for that btw), it's less about toy-soldiers but about expressing a historical interest for me.

If a manufacturer can't meet those expectations, they cut me out of their customer circle, with damage for both them and me. And in this case I simply can't follow the reasons of not satisfying both extreme ends of the spectrum. Though I may be part of a hopeless minority, in which case I'b begin to understand the really old farts of the hobby community's grumbling…

Celts weren't wild animals btw, but had a highly developed culture. Obviously not on par with the Greeks and Romans, but organized. And equipping everyone with shields has nothing to do with high organization or uniform thinking - it has to do with common sense. A combatant wouldn't jump into battle without a shield the same he wouldn't without a weapon - suicide would be a quicker option. And any Celt of a certain age would have amassed the ressources to provide him with weapon as well as shield. Anyone not would be not suited to serve in a medium/heavy infantry roll and serve as a skirmisher instead, like the young ones. Of course there are exceptions, but I doubt those summed up to 33%.

[Paul @ Warlord Games]

Noble said:

Would Warlord Games perhaps consider making an “armoury” pack, which would contain additional shields, weapons, bling, etc?

---

We're already working on something similar!

Cheers,

Paul

[Paul @ Warlord Games]

Paul Hicks said:

Maybe Warlord games could make a pack of extra shields in metal for those that just cannot do without the odd figure holding a shield. I think the use of the small round shield from the Roman box is a great idea.

Looking at all the extra gubbins you get on the sprues you would be mad not to use it. What would you rather a warrior holding a shield and severed heads or warrior holding a sword and severed heads.

Paul Hick

---

This is exactly where we're coming from Paul.

We're more interested in the overall feel of an army and seeing some great looking models than having every armed and posed the same - plenty of people already do that and it ain't what Warlord Games is about.

As for extras it was always in our release plan - maybe we will, as you say, produce a pack of metal shields for now while we finish the packs.

Cheers,

Paul

[hithero]

Paul Hicks said:

Maybe Warlord games could make a pack of extra shields in metal for those that just cannot do without the odd figure holding a shield.

Paul Hick

---

Its not really the 'odd' model without a shield though is it? It's half the models! not sure where Phil gets his 20 shields per box when there are only 5 per sprue of 10 models. Purchasing seperate shields is not really a viable option either as then that makes the advantage of buying cheap plastics pointless, especially if you want/need to buy additional transfers for them which are ridicuously expensive.

The problem is, is that theses boxed sets should allow the gamer to build his basic unit from them, but unfortunately we can't and future mold designs should bare this in mind.

Dave

[Phil]

I did not say there were 20 shields. I said that by the time you'd handed out standard, carynx, severed heads, etc, there'd be about nine or ten figures left without anything to carry in their left hands.

As for the idea that buying (if you must) enough shields for nine figures is ridiculously expensive, then you're living on another planet from me. Gripping Beast will sell you 40 shields for £4.50, and will also sell you enough LBMS transfers to cover 12 of those shields for £3. That's a total of £7.50 - hardly enough to break the bank. So, even if you insist on all the figures having shields, it's still only going to cost you £24.50 for 30 figures (and you'll have a load of shields left over for next time). If you bought Gripping Beast Celts, they'd run you £9 for 8 figures, and you've still got to buy shield transfers for them.

Okay, Economics 101. Gripping Beast's Celts, including shield transfers, will cost you £1.37 (and half a penny!) each (25p per shield transfer, plus £1.125 per figure). Warlord's Celts, if you insist on providing shields for every figure who doesn't have a 'legitimate' reason for carrying something else in his left hand (let's assume ten figures don't have anything to carry - a nice round number or my brain will hurt), will cost you on average, erm, 68.75p - if my sums are correct - 30 figures for £17 plus ten shields at 11.25p each plus ten transfers at 25p, all divided by 30. So, amazingly, Warlord's Celts are still only half the price of Gripping Beast's. And, personally speaking, I prefer Warlord's poses over Gripping Beast's.

Having said all that, I really, really, don't agree with you Dave. I think the Warlord Celts 'work' really well, just as they are.

Phil

[Mick in Switzerland1]

I do not think that people should get angry about this issue BUT I do think it is a very odd decision to only supply shielsd for half of the troops.

I expect historical wargames figures to be equipped in accordance with either my history books or common rulebooks - preferablly both.

Everything I have suggests that all Celts would have shields. So to only supply 50% is odd.

Mick

[Noble]

I would be ashamed if my company's products had to rely on cop-outs or other companies' products to make my product 'complete' - but well, I'm obviously not within the target market…

I don't see a reason not to give shield to models holding up severed heads, standards, or similar devices - if troppers can carry two javelins behind their shields, and if Roman standard bearers can carry their standard along with their shield, there shouldn't be a problem dangling some severed heads from the hand holding the shield…

Price-wise I'm not looking for anything just cheaper than current products - I'm looking for a breathtaking decrease in cost of 28mm army building - my personal pain barrier would be at €0.75 per model, something that is met by the Perrys' new plastics and by Wargames Factory (if those ever see the light)… Anything over that I will buy, if all the factors are right, but only then…

[hithero]

Phil said:

I did not say there were 20 shields. I said that by the time you'd handed out standard, carynx, severed heads, etc, there'd be about nine or ten figures left without anything to carry in their left hands.

As for the idea that buying (if you must) enough shields for nine figures is ridiculously expensive, then you're living on another planet from me. Gripping Beast will sell you 40 shields for £4.50, and will also sell you enough LBMS transfers to cover 12 of those shields for £3. That's a total of £7.50 - hardly enough to break the bank. So, even if you insist on all the figures having shields, it's still only going to cost you £24.50 for 30 figures (and you'll have a load of shields left over for next time). If you bought Gripping Beast Celts, they'd run you £9 for 8 figures, and you've still got to buy shield transfers for them.

Okay, Economics 101. Gripping Beast's Celts, including shield transfers, will cost you £1.37 (and half a penny!) each (25p per shield transfer, plus £1.125 per figure). Warlord's Celts, if you insist on providing shields for every figure who doesn't have a 'legitimate' reason for carrying something else in his left hand (let's assume ten figures don't have anything to carry - a nice round number or my brain will hurt), will cost you on average, erm, 68.75p - if my sums are correct - 30 figures for £17 plus ten shields at 11.25p each plus ten transfers at 25p, all divided by 30. So, amazingly, Warlord's Celts are still only half the price of Gripping Beast's. And, personally speaking, I prefer Warlord's poses over Gripping Beast's.

Having said all that, I really, really, don't agree with you Dave. I think the Warlord Celts 'work' really well, just as they are.

Phil

---

It's still £8.50 (you forgot postage) extra, half as much again to get what you should be getting anyway. And the units will sure look authentic with half of them carrying spare heads and several banners into the fray.

Dave