Strelets Forum

Welcome to the Strelets Forum.
Please feel free to discuss any aspect of 1/72 scale plastic figures, not simply Strelets.
If you have any questions about our products then we will answer them here.

Strelets Forum
Start a New Topic 
More coverage of current ranges rather or more new eras?

In my collection at present I have figures that represent over 100 armies. I collect practicaly everything from the New Kingdom Egyptians up to WW1. However, some of these armies may be represented by as little as 1 box, for example the Hat Franks (mini box with only 4 poses). Other armies are a more complex mix of figures from various manufacturers which may also include paint conversions or simple head swop conversions such as my 1798 to 1805 Austrians that has figures from Esci, Italeri, Hat and Stretlets plus conversions from Esci, Hat and Stretlets.

So at present I would prefer manufacturers to fill gaps in existing armies and periods rather start yet more periods that until now have been neglected.

Thus, I am happy with the fact that my Ancient Britons/Gauls/Celts are made up with figures from Airfix, Esci, Revell, Hat and Italeri since it gives the un-uniform appearance that this kind of army requires.

Similarly I am happy that Zvedza have released their Carthaginians to add to those produced by Hat and thus give me a more varied collection now with 3 different Libyan javelin men and 4 different citizen militia. Similarly with the Streltsi produced by Zvedza that can be mixed with those of Stretlets and mean that as a collector I can now get a reasonable amount rather than just the odd 1 with each set.

What do the rest of you think, fill the gaps in current ranges or yet more new eras that may lie under developed for years?

Best regards,


Re: More coverage of current ranges rather or more new eras?

Surely diversity is the life blood of the hobby!
Like you I have dozens of sets from different eras, Including a box of 'modern german army crisis reaction force', that I don't know what to do with, but which I bought on a whim. Yes completing an era of any warfare is important, but the more boxes on the market the better, as far as I'm concerned.
A new set of figures from a new era that has never been touched upon, might not be yours or my cup of tea, but it could be what someone else has always hoped to see in 1/72 scale figures.

It's great if your favorite eras are covered.........

unfortunately, mine aren't, at least not my very favorite eras. I don't care for ancients, medeivel, and most Napoleonics, in fact I got rid of almost all that I had.

So I am okay if new eras get covered. I still want those 1898 Span-Am sets, or anything from 1859 to 1918. As soon as EMHAR's 1870 sets come out, or Caesar or BUM's Span-Am sets, or Imex's Pancho Villa, and HaT's Brit Colonial sets, etc., then I'll be quiet.

And I'd still like a Camerone 1863 set/sets, or some WWII US/Japanese artillery sets.

WWI has been covered pretty well now and so has the American Civil War.

The problem is, most of what I want is coming from manufacturers with low output or that take forever to make sets. None of the prolific manufacturers are interested in my eras, or rather, they already have many pans in the fire. Guess I'm doomed.

Re: It's great if your favorite eras are covered.........

I agree that we need US/Japanese artillery sets.
Its always amazed me that there are about million WWII
sets of Germans, and so few of everybody else. The
Pacific definately needs to be better covered (1/32
metal and plastics are doing a much better job). Un-
fortunately, nothing seem to be in the works in 1/72nd. On the other hand, there are now more WWI sets
available than I ever dreamed there would be.

Re: More coverage of current ranges rather or more new eras?

Malcolm-I am sure you mean really well by this suggestion, and are not motivated by malice in any way. However it is one of the least smart idea that I have read. If this had been done in the days when the 1/72 market was pretty much defined by Airfix, there would be no Napoleonic line because they had just scratched the surface of the WWI, WWII, ACW, Colonial, Medieval and Imperial Roman eras. If done a few years ago, we wouldn't have Strelets GNW and Crimean sets, or the Caeser/HaT sets for the Ancient Middle East. If you did it today we wouldn't see the potentially promising announced series for new eras, including the Carlist wars, the Renaissance and the Mexican-American War.

There is something to be said for filling in more gaps, rather than just doing a few sets and moving on. However, it is unlikely that all the gaps in any particular range/era will be filled in, and if they were we would then hear the argument that new sets were still needed for that range/era because existing sets were not of sufficient quality or did not have the correct poses. Carried to its logical extreme we would end up with multiple sets for (as they were once known) the Lancers of the Vistula Legion.

Re: Re: More coverage of current ranges rather or more new eras?

I'm for covering more eras rather than filling in gaps. Having more eras to chose from might bring more people into the hobby, particularly if it's a completely new era like the Biblical-period sets that have been appearing recently. And, as Bill said, no era will ever be completely filled. There will always be demands for troops in winter dress or with campaign modifications, etc. Better to cover the basics in all eras and have modelers make conversions for specific troop types than to leave fans of one era having everything available "straight out of the box" and others with nothing.

supply and demand/quiet on the forum

Me I'm still waiting for strelets to produce the intened Crimean War Infantry sets.Okay They have been put on the shelf and passed over by the WW1 Stampede of cavalry figures .they must have had obvious market demand for that but yes the WW1 gaps needed to be plugged.Airfix paved the way, but left the jobb incomplete compared to WW2 range.

The WW1 battle options for collectors are now massive due to strelets identifying the market. But I stick obstinately to my sizeable crimean war plan collection.

Well this forum is quiet we're missing some sterling input people. I have been monitoring it for a couple of weeks(bring back the Dubio kid ..he'd set it alight again chuckel)

Reply to Bill

Dear Bill,

Without any malice, as I stated I already have figures that cover more than 100 armies and this is without collecting any post WWI. Of the eras that you and Arlin have mentioned basically are all the minor wars of the 19th century. You cannot include Renaissance in your list since I already have some armies started for the Italian Wars, TYW, ECW,Eastern European and Japanese.

In your own mail you mention if this idea had been voiced 30 years ago etc.. But I am not talking of 30 years ago I am talking of now. So in my eras that need to be expanded upon we already have the GNW, Crimea, Biblical eras, Trojan Wars etc..

I also like to see old sets expanded on, I am looking forward to getting hold of the Red Box Picts to add to my Hat figures. I believe that this is an example where a new company has seen a need in the market and produced their set without crossbow men since Hat already included them.

Finally, I cannot agree with you that the "logical extreme" would lead to multiple boxes of Napoleonic Polish Lancers. How could this be a logical end to filling the gaps in what must be close to 150 armies already in production.

If companies have not released figures for the small wars of the 19 century maybe its because they see small profits.

However, missing important troop types from armies that are not easily convertible due to peculiarities of the uniform or headdress (for example 18 century German Fusiliers for SYW, AWI) is frustrating.

Best regards,