|
Post by endeavour on Apr 3, 2019 18:30:28 GMT
While we're waiting on updates/announcements/re-releases etc I thought I'd offer up a thread to discuss Hat's share of the market, specifically within your collections. From idle curiosity I worked out recently how much of my collection is Hat, but then thought this information from many collectors might give Hat a better idea in which areas of the hobby it was under represented.
My collection is Napoleonic (no booing please), specifically the 100 days. Overall 65% of the collection is from Hat industrie, but this dips to 56% for the French and 49% for the Anglo-Netherlands. The Prussians are way out in front with 91% since I elected to replace my Revell Line infantry and Airfix Landwehr with Hat equivalents.
Not wishing to bore you with too many statistics, I will quickly add that Hat cavalry and artillery for both the French and Anglo-Netherlands are below 50%, with Anglo Netherlands Artillery specifically at a mere 11%. This might just be an exercise in Mathematics! However with Plasticpanzers pointing out the lack of French Artillery and the "Habite-Veste" era French Artillery particularly not being covered by anyone but Airfix, it might be of use.
Now, this isn't a demand for Hat to do my bidding (if only) indeed I suspect that many eras are ONLY available since Hat ventured into new territory. But if you are so inclined, get out your calculators, dust of the little grey cells and see what your collection tells you.
|
|
|
Post by minuteman on Apr 3, 2019 18:47:34 GMT
Interesting question. My collection extends to quite a lot of periods, so for example:
Napoleonics (5,000+ figures) HaT are about 50% of this
Ancients (2,000 figures or so) HaT are about 60%
However, my (smaller) collections of medieval, dark ages and 18th century (Great Northern War, War of Spanish Succession, AWI) don't have any HaT figures at all.,.. at least, not yet in the case of AWI ! Likewise ACW.
|
|
|
Post by plasticpanzers on Apr 4, 2019 3:12:55 GMT
About 50%. Alot are from (Exxi) (who shall not be named) that I picked up about 50-60 boxes for .50 cents each....
|
|
|
Post by ortwin on Apr 4, 2019 8:26:28 GMT
I'm collecting almost everything ancient and medieval.
I've got almost every Ancient-Set from HäT (just where not 'better' but better matching sets of other manufacturers exist i've got no HäT) and would also buy if there would be more, so it's about slightly under 30% i assume. Most of them are in my hellenic macedonian army, so they make up surely 60% of that (noting that there are topic-foreign sets included).
For medieval things it's similar with having almost every set so, hmm… i don't know, it makes out about 7%?
What i like is that HäT sets are easier to use for themes they aren't originally made for, and i'm gratefull to HäT for the several celtic sets which make about 70% of my celtic armies.
|
|
|
Post by greentiger on Apr 4, 2019 8:29:45 GMT
My collection is quite large and encompasses many scales and periods in both metal and plastic so possibly 10%...
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Apr 4, 2019 16:50:01 GMT
I have been collecting 1/72 since 1969 (other than an occasional GIANT Hong Kong set or two); so there are a LOT of Airfix in my collection (about every set they offered) - then on to ESCI and I have at least two or three boxes of most of their stuff. I used to buy everything that came out. Thankfully, discovering PSR allowed me to be more selective.
Since the turn of the Century I found I had to scale back as with the "Second Golden Age" of collecting there was just too much great stuff coming out (and most of it was good) for me to keep up with - both budgetwise and storagewise. I say this to put in context the fact that since I began limiting my collecting to primarily late 18th Century - 19th Century conflicts (with a big bent to ARW, ACW, and the "biggie" Napoleonics) - here HaT has managed to pretty much corner my market with their output. This is particularly since several companies experience big scaling issues around the turn of the century and then pretty much dropped out of the market completely and HaT's major competitor as far as volume was concerned IMO had quality issues.
So, in conclusion, I'd have to say the vast majority of the 1/72 figures I have purchased since 2000 have been HaT (and I have some 25,000 Napoleonics total - not including horses, arty, etc and about 5,000 ACW & ACW painted along with another 10,000 from other eras before I stopped collecting them). There have been recently some decent figures produced elsewhere and I applaud the improvement and buy them. But I do not think this in anyway will affect my purchases of future HaT sets nor my support of HaT and their figures. For me, it's more a matter of complementing different companies' figures rather than competing or replacing. I hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by stevo0113 on Apr 4, 2019 19:04:14 GMT
I have around 15,000 figures in my collection mostly Napoleonic with maybe 2,000 ww2 I would estimate 40% are from Hat maybe 20% airfix which covers most of my ww2 sets & 15% HaT The rest is from the usual suspects esci ,revel italieri & others. I expect my HaT collection to grow rapidly in the coming year & I will be trying to sell my old airfix sets
|
|
|
Post by paintdog on Apr 4, 2019 19:51:54 GMT
I started the hobby before Hat began production. After years of constant Hat releases, a sizeable majority of my figures were Hat. Over recent years as Hat has reduced output to a trickle, and I buy very few of their sets. Buying other plastic manufacturers and metal figures have meant that Hat has slipped to half or below the total. This thread made me think when I last bought a Hat box......to my shock, over two years. I used to come to the Hat forum everyday but that too has changed....once a fortnight? It's been a "good ride" with Hat but clearly things are, sadly, different. Donald
|
|
|
Post by richard on Apr 8, 2019 21:53:41 GMT
Maybe 25%. If they released the AWI range that would drastically rise though!
|
|
|
Post by cpn on Apr 9, 2019 22:10:11 GMT
Maybe 25%. If they released the AWI range that would drastically rise though! Oh Yeah! CPN
|
|
|
Post by Wagram 1809 on Apr 10, 2019 11:12:51 GMT
I have been collecting figurines since the 80s, which affects the proportion of my figurines. According to the nationalities the proportion is also different. I have between 6,500 and 7,000 figurines of the first empire. The hat soldiers represent 10% of Russians 100% of Bavarians 25% of Austrians 0% of Poles Out of more than 4000 French 25% of infantry are hat but 33% of wagons and no riders are hat
|
|
|
Post by Marco Zappa on Apr 12, 2019 20:16:03 GMT
I 've got 40% of my collection made of Hat sets.
|
|
|
Post by RBH_Jr on Apr 23, 2019 1:21:58 GMT
My collection is 1/32 scale and predominately Napoleonic.
Of my 2,500+ napoleonic soldiers, only about 1/4th is Hat.
My total # of Troops and portion that were Hat would be much larger if Hat were to restock their excellent French light infantry (especially the chasseur) sets & bring into production their Austrian Napoloenic masters! (And even bigger if they made French line infantry to the same standards as their French light).
Just today I bought 5 sets of Hat’s French long-coat infantry, 4 sets Brunswick Jagers & 1 set of French light infantry command.
I think the Hat Chasseurs are one of, if not the best 1/32 sets ever made.
Cheers
|
|
bessiere
Aedile
Painting my way from Vienna to Moscow
Posts: 70
|
Post by bessiere on Apr 30, 2019 16:52:09 GMT
Like Waynew I also started collecting Airfix in the late 1960's. The last few years I have only collected 1/72 Napoleonics so I would guess easily more than 50% of my collection is HaT since they are the sole manufacturer of many units and Nationalities in plastic at 1/72 scale. I despise the chunkiness of 28 mm and 1/72 is the smallest possible scale to retain any detail at all. This quality make it the ideal for collecting and gaming imo because you can create large armies inexpensively. More than anything I appreciate HaT for making so many unit types in Napoleonic era. A few sets like Prussian grenadiers and French elites should be done again wth fresh masters as the style of sculpting doesn't match with other HaT sets. Plus the faces are just plain ugly but that too is a matter of personal taste perhaps.
|
|
bessiere
Aedile
Painting my way from Vienna to Moscow
Posts: 70
|
Post by bessiere on Apr 30, 2019 17:03:50 GMT
I started the hobby before Hat began production. After years of constant Hat releases, a sizeable majority of my figures were Hat. Over recent years as Hat has reduced output to a trickle, and I buy very few of their sets. Buying other plastic manufacturers and metal figures have meant that Hat has slipped to half or below the total. This thread made me think when I last bought a Hat box......to my shock, over two years. I used to come to the Hat forum everyday but that too has changed....once a fortnight? It's been a "good ride" with Hat but clearly things are, sadly, different. Donald I have to wonder if Hat is trying to compete with the Perry 28mm madness in current vogue which could be a mistake. They have a loyal following who would be thrilled to see some new sets of 1/72. I find myself wishing for separate heads and arms so I can create new poses rather than the 4 you get in many cavalry sets. Even some farm animals and civilians would be a welcome addition. Like most here I could go on and on about personal desires but I will add I was disappointed to see the new releases in scales other than 1/72 but that's business and I don't fault them for expanding their market. [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 1, 2019 1:54:13 GMT
I don't know, I thought it has been explained a multitude of times that the 28mm British cavalry was a glitch, a mistake, a BOO-BOO and not an attempt on HaT's part to venture back into the 28mm scale again. I thought that's why HaT has been going through all the back flips, somersaults, and hoops doing size comparisons and quality control on this forum and other places.
What's it going to take to drop this, the owners crawling on their hands and knees across the Alps in the middle of winter in sackcloth and ashes to be flogged in public?
|
|
|
Post by Zaphod on May 3, 2019 7:42:34 GMT
Returned to the hobby two years ago after a 25-year break.
Started with a new WW2 army mainly for Chain of Command, now about 200 figures strong, a mix of First-to-Fight, Revell and metal castings. So far have only a single box of HaT German bicyclists, still on their sprues, so not included in the overall army strength above.
A far bigger project is my Napoleonic force based around my 1980s armies which were then about 500 strong in all, mainly Airfix plus about 100 Minifigs metals. Have now refurbished most of these old units and am gradually expanding them, padding out old units from 14 men to 20/24 men, which looks far better on the tabletop. So far have added about 200 new figures, mainly Airfix, Italeri and Minifigs, but including a pack of HaT British Light Infantry, some HaT Brunswick Avant Garde, and my current WIP, a pack of British Light Dragoons. Some HaT Nassau infantry wait on their sprues as do some HaT Brunswick infantry, though I’m reluctant to paint the latter because they look so spindly and wooden even when compared to the Airfix figs that make up the bulk of my force. In all, I would estimate that HaT figures make up about 30% of my new additions.
I’ve usually gone for HaT in cases where I couldn’t get suitable figures in another brand. Generally, I prefer my 1/72 figs to have a little more meat on them. Oddly enough my Airfix bods never looked too much out of place alongside my Minifigs 25mm figures, especially the older S Range offerings. Ditto Italeri, Zvezda and HaT. The HaT figs don’t seem to fit in as well, making me reluctant to add more.
|
|
|
Post by Zaphod on May 3, 2019 8:41:58 GMT
Ahh, forgot the German WW2 field wagon and the Napoleonic French Supply Wagon, both truly excellent kits and a superb addition to my armies. Would happily add more German field wagons. These are the kind of things, along with limbers, caissons, etc. that other manufacturers overlook and HaT does best (imho).
|
|
|
Post by Zaphod on May 3, 2019 17:22:21 GMT
I have to wonder if Hat is trying to compete with the Perry 28mm madness in current vogue which could be a mistake. Is 28mm just a passing fad? I’m not convinced. It’s the perfect scale for former modellers who want to actually see the uniforms of the little soldiers under their command. That’s just about possible with 1:72 scale, for a good painter (but you still lose most of the detail), becoming difficult in 15mm (actually 18mm if you go for the best figures on the market), and pretty well impossible in anything smaller — you might as well be using card counters. If I had unlimited space to fight battles and store figures and terrain, unlimited funds to buy 28mm figs (which are significantly more expensive) and unlimited time to paint my armies, I would definitely go for 28mm.
|
|
|
Post by joe5790 on May 3, 2019 21:45:49 GMT
28mm is not a passing fad. It is the new standard for all wargaming. The fact historical wargaming held out as long as it has is amazing, but Perry and Warlord are quickly stamping their preferred scale into the scene, and most wargamers who play historical games now grew up with Warhammer and other companies making minis in 28mm.
So 28mm is going nowhere and ignoring and dismissing it as a fad is just foolhardy and short sighted. So I believe HaT should put more effort into adding some 28mm sets. The ones they made before were perfectly good. Sure they don't stack up in terms of bulk to some other minis ranges, but they are perfectly fine by themselves.
EDIT:
The reason that most 28mm models are so bulky compared to the like minis that HaT make is that while HaT commission larger scale master models and then scan them into the computer and work from there, 28mm models are almost exclusively sculpted at 28mm. At that scale it is fairly hard to get the proportions exactly correct making it very easy to get a more bulky look and feel.
Computer sculpting is now becoming the norm, so more accurate proportions can be achieved, but since the previous lines of models have the bulkier aesthetic they try to match it because that's what most customers are used to seeing.
|
|
bessiere
Aedile
Painting my way from Vienna to Moscow
Posts: 70
|
Post by bessiere on May 9, 2019 16:59:33 GMT
I say it might be a mistake for HaT as there is a prejudice against 1/72 plastics and their manufacturers. Kind of a stigma you might say. Even though Perry are also plastic there are many detachable parts and in some sense they are true models. Even Perry has the plastics stigma but for companies like HaT or Zvezda their softer plastics and lack of possible variation would place them squarely in the last place for 28mm figs. Perhaps it's a snobbery thing with cast metals and their expense - those who've spent $20K building their armies likely resent those making similar armies from plastics for $5K. There are psychological aspects to collecting here that I'm not sure even the best efforts of HaT could overcome in the 28mm market. Reputation/plastic types/cost/history of gaming are all components and my argument is to stick with what you do best. 1/72 is affordable for everyone allowing young people the opportunity to engage in collecting and gaming. My youngest got in to 40k warhammer years ago but got priced out of the market, something that won't happen with 1/72 scale.
Joe5790: I agree with all your comments about 28mm, the detail and painting opportunities they present. I dislike the chubbiness factor very much myself though and would never consider putting the "fat men" on my painting bench.
|
|
|
Post by joe5790 on May 10, 2019 0:35:34 GMT
The issue with 1/72 though is that fewer gamers are using the scale for gaming and finding players is getting harder and harder the more 28mm is spread.
I started collecting 1/72 scale last year, only to have to start a 28mm army instead because I couldn't get anyone interested in using the scale, and many others already had 28mm armies. So my choice was start a 28mm army, or don't game at all.
If your in a 1/72 scale dominant area then your good to go. If not, then you have little alternative but to go for the more expensive 28mm.
The latter point is why I want HaT to make more 28mm models as they are the cheapest ones on the market and the quality is great regardless of what some say. Multi part kits are overrated, especially for time periods like the SYW or Napoleonic Wars where all of the soldiers are either marching in formation, or some combination of shooting/reloading/charging etc.
Also, I would love for HaT to revisit some of their older ancient sets and digitize them and remake some of those sets into a variation of the MAC Formula, though with a box for battle/shield wall type formation poses (shield to the front with sword/spear at the ready) and action poses in another box. The older sets need a revamp as there are a lot of worthless and bad poses in them.
|
|
bessiere
Aedile
Painting my way from Vienna to Moscow
Posts: 70
|
Post by bessiere on May 10, 2019 0:52:48 GMT
The issue with 1/72 though is that fewer gamers are using the scale for gaming and finding players is getting harder and harder the more 28mm is spread. I started collecting 1/72 scale last year, only to have to start a 28mm army instead because I couldn't get anyone interested in using the scale, and many others already had 28mm armies. So my choice was start a 28mm army, or don't game at all. If your in a 1/72 scale dominant area then your good to go. If not, then you have little alternative but to go for the more expensive 28mm. The latter point is why I want HaT to make more 28mm models as they are the cheapest ones on the market and the quality is great regardless of what some say. Multi part kits are overrated, especially for time periods like the SYW or Napoleonic Wars where all of the soldiers are either marching in formation, or some combination of shooting/reloading/charging etc. Also, I would love for HaT to revisit some of their older ancient sets and digitize them and remake some of those sets into a variation of the MAC Formula, though with a box for battle/shield wall type formation poses (shield to the front with sword/spear at the ready) and action poses in another box. The older sets need a revamp as there are a lot of worthless and bad poses in them. I was sorely tempted to start by building a Carthaginian and Roman armies but opted for the massive complexity of Napoleonics so I agree some remakes of the ancients would be a great thing and perhaps something I will find time to do myself. As for the "gaming community" where I live I doubt anyone plays at all. I am going to have to build both armies and cajole friends or grandchildren in to playing most likely. If there is a gaming community it's likely the fantasy/sci fi or WW stuff neither of which appeals to me. I'm still investigating various rule sets to see which seem the most playable yet realistic of that type combat.
|
|
|
Post by joe5790 on May 10, 2019 12:45:06 GMT
Well, for rule sets for 18th century/Napoleonic era, Black Powder is probably the simplest set of rules.
Gä-Pä is also a fairly decent rule set. It was originally designed for early 18th century but the century is generic enough to allow it to work for the whole period. This rule sets only issue is that it leaves quite a bit of what you would expect would be a given up to the player to figure out (like deciphering what stat is a battalions wounds, or how far each unit can move as it gives all measurements in 'paces' instead of inches or milimeters). Other than these issues, it's fairly easy to use.
|
|
|
Post by grumble on May 14, 2019 2:12:53 GMT
I have never taken the time to inventory my figures -- painted and unpainted -- to count how many are from various manufacturers. With mixed units and even mixed stands, it would be an exercise in madness, besides being a waste of time that I could use to be painting, basing and planning scenarios.
One thing I can say is that since I began in the 1960's -- long before HäT -- the majority of my figures are from manufacturers other than HäT.
On the other hand, I'm fairly sure that in recent years the majority of the figures I have purchased are from HäT, thanks to the development of ranges that I never had access to before -- so I'm making up for lost time!
|
|