Combined Arms Battalion, FRR 3rd Hussars, Invasion era

[Baron RedSkull]

Nice worl. I'm excited to see your LoM project. I'm planning to do one myself at some point so seeing how you do yours will be a big help.

[Getz]

I have recently completed a 3rd Hussars company myself.  I should get some pictures of it uploaded...

[worktroll]

Worktroll, i really like your combined arms battalions. (Did you have list somewhere? Though i guess most older pics are no longer available due to Solaris7 site being down...)

Originally i would have said i don't like the paint scheme but after thinking about it long enough, i think it is actually pretty reasonable. Camouflage but not camouflage, if that makes sense.

Thanks, Empyrus. I'll have to start reloading my pics on Google Photos, and do another retrospective with the newer links.

Re the splinter camo - it's a disruptive pattern, designed to break up outlines. You get the best impression of that in the armour company photo, where they're all pushed together. I have tended to downplay that element - well done disruptive schemes make minis look like blurry blobs ;) I aim for an "enhanced realism" approach in most camo schemes, overplaying contrast and bringing up details & trim.

Baron Redskull, LoM is pretty easy to paint. Base & prime black, do some Worktroll White drybrushing with panel line marking, clean up with black, detail/metallic, then darg grey drybrush over the black top half. It's working up the units that's fun - LoM can have all the good toys. So the Palmoni and Vanquisher are probably going to be teamed with a Legacy, Grand Crusader, Shedu BA, and something else in the Jugger category, for an urban assault Level II.

Getz, I'd love to see your pics, and hear how you went about it. Did you find the scheme annoying to paint, too? Or was that just me ;)

[Empyrus]

I was thinking of the color when i said "camo but not camo".
I cannot think of many environments where brown-gray and blues and purples (or indigo?) work. Some kind of tundra with ice piles perhaps?

Though i can understand it being disruptive, IIRC color is not that important for braking up outline anyway, shape and contrast mattering more.

[worktroll]

I cannot think of many environments where brown-gray and blues and purples (or indigo?) work. Some kind of tundra with ice piles perhaps?

[Empyrus]

Huh, i guess it does work.

Too bad you didn't have a Catapult in the battalion. I recall they served SLDF in mountaineer regiments or some such, would've been good fit for the camouflage.

[I am Belch II]

That is some good stuff.

[Colt Ward]

Actually, color is very important to break up the shape of the object.  You use a dark color on the edges and a lighter color in the areas that are more recessed.  Best example I can give was what they went over with in our camo class . . . for the nose, eyebrow area, cheek bones and chin you used a black or dark gray/brown/green.  In what would be shaded area like the eye sockets, cheeks and upper lip you used a brighter/ighter green/brown/sand color.

I had started a discussion about this a while back because I was doing a forest camo scheme and I was not seeing anything like I remember our vehicles being painted.

[Daemion]

Because that's how the UAC Vedette rocks  ::)

I agree, I was quite disappointed with the mini. I played with a bunch of options, but canonically it looks like that.

You can't point it the other way, because then the turret can't turn to the right at all because of the protruding barrel. If one wanted, one could mount it on a spacer, so it rose above the hump, and turn the mini around. May end up doing that yet ...

I may look into that as well, because I always got the impression that the turret in the TRo Art was stylistically action-posed and that the nose of the vehicle was what appears to be the hiney on the miniature.

[worktroll]

Let's see if I still have my Google Photo mojo ...



The Ultra-Vedette controversy continues to rage! (mildy.)

From left to right: with Turret facing 'backwards', with turret as per TRO art, and facing backwards with a spacer to raise the turret above the 'hump'.

I think nmost people would agree that the first one looks best - albeit only able to aim to the left.  The spaced version just looks odd. Ah well ...

[Vash The Stampede]

The vedette's main body looks like a good candidate for the front half of a Gulltoppr omni-monitor

[worktroll]

MW:DA Kelswa is perfect for the Golden Horse ...

[Charlie 6]

Let's see if I still have my Google Photo mojo ...



The Ultra-Vedette controversy continues to rage! (mildy.)

From left to right: with Turret facing 'backwards', with turret as per TRO art, and facing backwards with a spacer to raise the turret above the 'hump'.

I think nmost people would agree that the first one looks best - albeit only able to aim to the left.  The spaced version just looks odd. Ah well ...

I'll disagree.  I love the mini.  I would have liked it to have a dual weapon turret but I can't help but imagine it peeking around a street corner (only peeking to the right, mind you) to tear up an advancing column.  Stylistically, I like pairing the Vedette RAC with Prowler multi-terrain vehicles, and the diametrically opposed Goblin.

[Daemion]

I think nmost people would agree that the first one looks best - albeit only able to aim to the left.  The spaced version just looks odd. Ah well ...

Maybe its the form of spacer you used. I don't mind the look, and it seems okay. I'll point you to the Striker wheeled missile vehicle for an idea of a spacer, because that one looks good. If you manage something like that, you'll be golden, in my opinion.