1/32 HäT Blog

Quote from Jay from the HaT forum:

"I would suspect that many 1/32 toy soldier collectors barely know that these are out. I've rarely seen them discussed on any of the boards, or showcased in the few magazines that are out."

I don't really know of any other boards that are out there other than the Hobby Bunker or the Tree Frog one or any magazines other than the two British ones, so what are these mysterious boards and magazines that Jay referenced to?

Here's a chance to swap stories: What is your best memory regarding toy soldiers? Was it a particular set you received? A memorable battle fought with the little guys? Or... use your imagination (just keep it to a PG please ;-) ).

When Rick Conte came out with his "Warlord" and "Zulu" sets back in the early 90s he rocked the 1/32 scale figure collecting world on its heels with his larger "true 1/32" (his words) figures. There was much howling and protest on the part of many of us "boomers" in the US over the fact his figures made dwarves of our cherished toy soldiers from our childhood. By the same token, the new guys weren't 60mm either so you couldn't really mix them well with those guys either.

But they were beautiful sculpts and we snatched them up. In a few years other makers were making their figures compatable with Conte's new scale - a larger 1/32.

With HaT plunging into 1/32 in such a big way I find most of their figures tend to bridge the gap between the "old" 1/32 and the "new" 1/32 quite well. As of now, we haven't seen any of the "new' scale in Napoleonics (except perhaps Conte's Alamo Mexicans and these guys are large even for Conte).

So the question is (yes, there is a question and subject for comment here), how much difference can you tolerate in figures? Do you mix and match varous companies figures in spite of slight differences in size? How about mixing/matching 1/32 scale with 60mm figures?

Or is style of sculpting more important?

Okay, I'm going to borrow a subject for a thread. We've already discussed this over on the Forum so I thought it might be fun to do here with some modification (folks had so much trouble just choosing ONE figure):

What is your favorite pose from given eras or wars? (this allows you to choose more than just one); I know this is still a tough one because as I write this I can think of several various poses from the same sets that come to mind. We can even entertain different sides or armies from the same war if you're only into a certain period/era or two (say WWII German pose, WWII US, WWII Russian, British, etc.)

Maybe an explanation of why this one or that one is your favorite. Who knows? It might give our friends at HaT some ideas when developing their own figures (not that it appears they need much help in the idea department) as to what we collectors like in our guys.

Over the years I had placed several obstacles to painting my 1/32 guys, even though I've been painting my 1/72 guys for over twenty-five years.

At first there was the idea of paint chipping and peeling off the plastic. That's been overcome with new acrylics and paints, learning about sealants, as well as new types of plastics that seem to hold the paint better.

One objection prevails (though I admit, it doesn't seem as great as perhaps it once was) was the sheer imagination of playing with the little plastic guys. Growing up before we had all this variety of sets I remember "making do" with what we had.

I remember making a makeshift Alamo church out of an empty shoe box and using my Civil War guys and cowboys as defenders and attackers. My ACW guys with kepis were the Mexicans and my guys with floppy or felt hats were the Texians. It worked in my imagination.

I suppose this goes today as well, I could use any of my blue colored shakoed Napoleonic figures be they French or Prussian to reinforce Santa Anna's Army with a little imagination they work. But once painted realism intrudes its ugly head. A French Line Infantryman is a French Line Infantryman, the facings and epaulets - not to mention colors of pants and other items are all wrong.

This even goes within a conflict and the same army. How about early war US GIs in their khaki drab/brown uniforms as opposed to later war uniforms? Unpainted who cares if the other details are all right (no M-16s, please)? Even unit patches. My World War II paratroopers can serve as any airborne unit in the war, if I paint them, they will have to become either 82nd, 101st, or even 17th Airborne. Then I wont be able to use them in a Pacific battle unless I give them the 11th Airborne patch. Of course, the solution is to buy more figures so I have enough guys to fill all needs, right?

But what say you all? True, painting can enhance the realism of our little guys, but is the price the joy and wonder we used to have playing with our unpainted guys and imagining them to be whatever it was we wanted them to be?

For the moment, I am busy with one of my medium term projects.