Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I've just started a VC army, but was really attracted to Lizzies and Empire too. I liked Lizzies cos of their brutality, their great models and their colourfulness, but I liked empire because of their image as a disciplined, human army, fighting against all manner of evil beings right at the forefront of the war against chaos, occassionally helped by HE and Dwarfs.
The main problem for me with empire though was the models. Some, like pistoliers, outriders, knights and artillery, look great, and I prefer plastics as a beginner, but I couldn't get over three things:
1) the feathers. How can you take an enemy seriously when his soldiers decorate themselves with big, bright feathers?!
2) baggy clothes. This, compounded with the feathers, totally derails the image of them being a professional army. I wish the models were more Roman-esque, with practical aspects.
3) no shoes. I couldn't believe it when I saw state troops without shoes!!! This, added to the last two, was the last straw for me. The Empire, supposed to be the greatest realm in the Old World, can't afford to give its "professional" state troops shoes! But it CAN give them feathers and baggy clothes!
Still, the pistoliers look good even though they have big feathers, cos they're armour is plentiful so the feathers are negated, but lots of state troops dont have helmets either, just big floppy hats!!!
Is anyone with me on this? I know it's a rant but I'm just annoyed cos otherwise I'd have been an Empire Captain in a moment. I think it's a real shame. Surely a Roman-looking army would be more attractive (even if it had to be updated to include blackpowder weapons)?
Baggy clothes you say?
English civil war, dutch war of independence, 60 years war.
Feathers on hats? And why would anyone want to go to war with them?
17th century soldiers, and italian soldiers in Iraq, >2003.
And why Roman? Plenty of platforms have Romans, all fantasy systems are medieval, but WHFB is more unique: they have an early renaissance, late medieval theme. That's why i love Empire.
Edit: Fine i do agree with the no shoes! I painted those black, noone notices anyways .
Last edited by Zema; March 31st, 2009 at 18:36.
Got a "good" rumour from a GW staffer? Forget about it, LO'ers know more than any random GW shop staffer.
Voor alle nederlanders:
The Dutch Legion
As for the barefeet state troops:
Just get a box of militia/free company (due to their versatility you most likely will come to want one or more anyways ) and swap a couple of those legs around.
Tough I admit I'm content that my state troops are basically all 6th edition blokes
It ain't easy bein' green... :-)
the baggy clothes are to keep movement unimpeded, if you think of empire armour types as light armour being a breastplate with free movement of the arms and legs and heavy armour as a breastplate and mail shirt/trousers=less movement, but better protection with full plate being completely integrated.
There have been lots of wars going on involving the Empire, im sure they're being stretched to their limits. Maybe they can no longer afford shoes? It sucks yes, but as for the feathers and baggy clothes Im 100% behind Zemaphore. It adds loads of character.
Maybe they just prefer to run around barefoot, hm? Though I'm musing that maybe green stuffed foot wraps might work.
The feathers are cool in moderation, unless you're adorning a particularly pompous general (in which case moderation's for losers), and I far prefer the baggy clothes of the old models to the tights of these ones.
Baggy armour would also serve a practical purpose in hiding the defined lines and contours of the body, making it harder for weapons such as rapiers to hit vital spots.
Think of movies like Count of Monte Cristo, people actually use cloaks and baggy sleeves to deflect blows, snag blades and make it difficult for the opponent to see where their actual body is. Obviously that’s movie lala land but the principle is still there.
Then again in WHFB where everyone has a six foot meat clever I can see your point about that attire becoming somewhat redundant.
Zemaphore, out of the pics you posted only the soldiers in the first one look threatening. Fair enough the italian modern soldiers do too, but only cos theyve got camo (and machine guns etc!). And the guys in the first one look mean in part cos theyve got proper helmets and no feathers!! Therefore the baginess isnt such a problem. The Italian soldiers obviously only have the feathers as a nod to tradition, they still look bad and are probably of zero use in a fight. The portraits of other C17th soldiers just look (to me) pretentious and artsy rather than made for fighting.
Orkbert thanks for the tip on the leg-swapping! It would be acceptable to me for militia not to have shoes, even though it's still not ideal!
I suppose I just like soldiers to look mean. I'm a big fan of the Dark Elf corsair models, plastic black orcs and the new Chaos Chosen infantry and Chaos Knights - they all look like they were made for fighting. Similarly I like the armour-heaviness of dwarfs, tho I'd never collect them cos theyve no magic or cavalry. Guess I can't have my cake and eat it after all!!!
Ok so here is an example, your walking down a street its 7pm and a man steps out wearing the baggy 17th century uniform displayed and brandishing a sword. You immediately shit your pants because you realize you do not have a sword, or baggy clothes with which to try and wrap his sword up and steal it away from him. He moves forward, and after a short chase after you turn to run and hide. He proceeds to cut you up before finally running you through.
Now does that sound menacing? Military dress is awesome, its always looked awesome. And if you ask alot of ladies they enjoy the baggy clothes look worn through the renaissance, thanks to several good looking actors so there.