Just a question for HBG. Is HBG moving more towards 3D printing rather than plastic injection molding in it’s product line? If so are you move toward more frequent smaller 3D, rather than larger and less frequent injection molded set? Or will you begin going more toward larger more frequent 3D sets ?
Just a question for HBG. Is HBG moving more towards 3D printing rather than plastic injection molding in it’s product line? If so are you move toward more frequent smaller 3D, rather than larger and less frequent injection molded set? Or will you begin going more toward larger more frequent 3D sets ?
As far as 3D printing has come, it still seems like plastic injection still has better overall quality. The 3D pieces look coarse. Almost pixelated in 3D form.
You can easily see in these photos:
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Going-Nuclear-Expansion-Set-B-29-Atom-Bomb-markers_p_1880.html
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Me-323-Gigant-3D-Printed-Aircraft-Set_p_1881.html
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/H-44-German-Super-Battleship-Set-3d-Printed_p_1981.html
The detail seems to be much better than OOB and as good as HBG pieces injection molding, however it is the surface texture (as a painter) that concerns me.
Here is one of Tall Paul’s APD destroyer/transports from another thread. They are 3D printed from Shapeways and you can really see the surface texture in this hi-res photo. Granted, it may not be quite as visible at distance, but it is pretty apparent to me. Looks like it was eaten by acid.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=26127.msg1287679#msg1287679
I guess this means I am voting to continue major set production with injection molding until 3D printing can be done with greater resolution, as it were. That is… if I had a vote. :roll:
I would agree LH. Injection molding is superior. I pose the question because of the market and the place a small company like HBG and others are positioned.
There’s only so many miniatures to make for A&A and similar games that I wondered if the direction HBG was going was to; go with smaller but more numerous releases, or larger less frequent releases due to the high cost of overseas manufacturing.
or larger less frequent releases due to the high cost of overseas manufacturing.
I think that overseas manufacturing is actually used because it’s low-cost rather than high cost. Getting HBG’s injection-molded sculpts manufactured domestically in the U.S. would probably be more expensive. The problem with overseas manufacturing is low speed rather than high cost: the HBG units currently seem to be being manufactured at a very slow pace, on top of the shipping problems that have complicated matters further.
@CWO:
I think that overseas manufacturing is actually used because it’s low-cost rather than high cost. Getting HBG’s injection-molded sculpts manufactured domestically in the U.S. would probably be more expensive. The problem with overseas manufacturing is low speed rather than high cost: the HBG units currently seem to be being manufactured at a very slow pace, on top of the shipping problems that have complicated matters further.
Never been in the business myself, but it does seemed like you are damned either way:
Domestic manufacture: High Costs, but speed and reliability of product
Foreign manufacture: Low Cost, but slow speed, unreliability and complications
I feel for HBG’s situation.
In either case, quality is most important to me. I would rather wait longer (or maybe pay more) and get a smoother, more detailed product. As opposed to having a bunch of small, frequent releases that are of middling quality or detail. My opinion anyway.
The issue with the foreign manufacture route really appears to be reliability of shipments and communication. You roll the dice when you are a small company dealing with China it seems. Isn’t that what sunk FMG a while back?
You’re correct Marc at high volume it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. What I mean is the high production cost of the molds verses smaller printed domestic runs.
I’ve researched quite a bit about miniature manufacture. Although I’m no expert. I’m curious to see what HBG’s take is and what place they see themselves in the future.
I for one would prefer HBG to keep up with the injection molded sets. Sure they may take longer to get sometimes but they are of excellent quality and much cheaper. When they put out a new set that I am interested in, I tend to get several sets because I like large numbers of units for my gaming (I prefer not to use chips if possible). I can get the large numbers with the injection molded sets. For example, the sets usually average about $10-$11 for 28-30 pieces so I can afford to get 5 or 10 or even more sets if I want to.
With the 3D printing pieces, I could never get the big numbers that I want to. For example, take the new H44 German Battleship. They are $4.95 each. I like to have 20 of each for capital ships for each nation’s inventory. That would cost me about $100 and I wouldn’t get any of the other units that come in the injection molded sets (men, tanks, planes, other ships, etc.).
So, while printing 3D pieces may be cheaper than creating a new mold for injection molding (although I would point out once you have the mold made, you can make as many injection mold sets and keep selling them. Eventually the mold cost will be paid and you will start getting profit.)
From a gamer/collector stand point, the 3D pieces are actually more expensive. So I fervently hope that HBG keeps making the sets because that’s where my interest lies.
I for one would prefer HBG to keep up with the injection molded sets. […] From a gamer/collector stand point, the 3D pieces are actually more expensive. So I fervently hope that HBG keeps making the sets because that’s where my interest lies.
Agreed. I’d say both methods of production have their valid uses, but they serve different purposes. Injection moulding is the best approach for pieces that, in principle, people will want to acquire in large numbers – basically, conventional combat units that get used a lot in a standard game. 3D-printing is better suited for very specialized units that aren’t needed in large numbers, like the A-bombs of HBG’s “Going Nuclear” set and the new Nimitz-class carrier it introduced for a time-travel scenario derived from the movie The Final Countdown.
@CWO:
I for one would prefer HBG to keep up with the injection molded sets. […] From a gamer/collector stand point, the 3D pieces are actually more expensive. So I fervently hope that HBG keeps making the sets because that’s where my interest lies.
Agreed. I’d say both methods of production have their valid uses, but they serve different purposes. Injection moulding is the best approach for pieces that, in principle, people will want to acquire in large numbers – basically, conventional combat units that get used a lot in a standard game. 3D-printing is better suited for very specialized units that aren’t needed in large numbers, like the A-bombs of HBG’s “Going Nuclear” set and the new Nimitz-class carrier it introduced for a time-travel scenario derived from the movie The Final Countdown.
This is what Coach has told me, as well. Special units will be done in 3D with special rules and the normal things will be in the sets. This has been his plan for some time. :-)
This is what Coach has told me, as well. Special units will be done in 3D with special rules and the normal things will be in the sets. This has been his plan for some time.
Good. Very sensible.
Just a question for HBG. Is HBG moving more towards 3D printing rather than plastic injection molding in it’s product line? If so are you move toward more frequent smaller 3D, rather than larger and less frequent injection molded set? Or will you begin going more toward larger more frequent 3D sets ?
As far as 3D printing has come, it still seems like plastic injection still has better overall quality. The 3D pieces look coarse. Almost pixelated in 3D form.
You can easily see in these photos:Â
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Going-Nuclear-Expansion-Set-B-29-Atom-Bomb-markers_p_1880.html
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Me-323-Gigant-3D-Printed-Aircraft-Set_p_1881.html
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/H-44-German-Super-Battleship-Set-3d-Printed_p_1981.htmlThe detail seems to be much better than OOB and as good as HBG pieces injection molding, however it is the surface texture (as a painter) that concerns me.
Here is one of Tall Paul’s APD destroyer/transports from another thread. They are 3D printed from Shapeways and you can really see the surface texture in this hi-res photo. Granted, it may not be quite as visible at distance, but it is pretty apparent to me. Looks like it was eaten by acid.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=26127.msg1287679#msg1287679I guess this means I am voting to continue major set production with injection molding until 3D printing can be done with greater resolution, as it were. That is… if I had a vote. :roll:
I totally agree with you Hoffman…and am in the same boat. These 3D pieces do look coarse in texture…and tall paul’s destroyer…well painted…but up close looks like it was sunken and under the sea with coral for years! Im on the fence…i like the variety of units, but I dry brush all my pieces and these textures would pick up all the highlights in the wrong way. Wasn’t there something on shapeways… about two different types of plastic finishes you can order for the piece? with quite a difference in cost?
Wasn’t there something on shapeways… about two different types of plastic finishes you can order for the piece? with quite a difference in cost?
There was a discussion along those lines of page 12 of this thread:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33379.165
Just a question for HBG. Is HBG moving more towards 3D printing rather than plastic injection molding in it’s product line?� If so are you move toward more frequent smaller 3D, rather than larger and less frequent injection molded set? Or will you begin going more toward larger more frequent 3D sets ?
As far as 3D printing has come, it still seems like plastic injection still has better overall quality. The 3D pieces look coarse. Almost pixelated in 3D form.
You can easily see in these photos:�
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Going-Nuclear-Expansion-Set-B-29-Atom-Bomb-markers_p_1880.html
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Me-323-Gigant-3D-Printed-Aircraft-Set_p_1881.html
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/H-44-German-Super-Battleship-Set-3d-Printed_p_1981.htmlThe detail seems to be much better than OOB and as good as HBG pieces injection molding, however it is the surface texture (as a painter) that concerns me.
Here is one of Tall Paul’s APD destroyer/transports from another thread. They are 3D printed from Shapeways and you can really see the surface texture in this hi-res photo. Granted, it may not be quite as visible at distance, but it is pretty apparent to me. Looks like it was eaten by acid.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=26127.msg1287679#msg1287679I guess this means I am voting to continue major set production with injection molding until 3D printing can be done with greater resolution, as it were. That is… if I had a vote.� :roll:
––JWO & others,
I feel that I should explain a few things in order that everyone understands about 3D printing from SHAPEWAYS.
----YES, the APD destroyer transport ended up looking like it was dipped in an acid bath! But that’s simply because after 5 different paint colors a dull coat finish was applied and that is what unfortunately caused the unfortunate “acid bath” look,…not the quality of the unit beforehand.
Before the APD was painted it was UNBELIEVABLY DETAILED. It was our painting mistake that messed it up.
----I can’t stress this point enough. When orderring units from SHAPEWAYS you basically get what you pay for! If you want high-quality, unbelievably detailed units, you must order them in F.U.D. (Frosted Ultra Detail) plastic. Yes, they cost more in F.U.D., about $2.00-$3.00 each usually.
––If you want to only pay .50 each for the units, YES, you will get a much less detailed unit with rough surfaces and sometimes a “pock mark” or “washbord” look. Like I said,…you get what you pay for as far as quality terms.
----I think that if everyone on this forum that has ever orderred anything from SHAPEWAYS voiced their opinions they would agree with the above formula:
units orderred in FROSTED ULTRA DETAIL plastic are awesomely detailed, but WORTH THE EXTRA COST if you want nice looking units! I know that everything that I’ve orderred, from whatever designer, that was produced in F.U.D. I have been totally pleased with!––And if you find something you like,…but it’s in the wrong size (proportion/scale), almost all of the designers will re-draw the unit in the scale you want. I can’t tell you how many times a designer re-drew and aircraft from 1/700 to 1/500 for me. It’s simply a matter of time for the designer.
Tall Paul
I totally agree with you Hoffman…and am in the same boat. These 3D pieces do look coarse in texture…and tall paul’s destroyer…well painted…but up close looks like it was sunken and under the sea with coral for years! Im on the fence…i like the variety of units, but I dry brush all my pieces and these textures would pick up all the highlights in the wrong way. Wasn’t there something on shapeways… about two different types of plastic finishes you can order for the piece? with quite a difference in cost?
Hey Paul! That is awesome. Thanks for the response. I knew you had a good deal of personal experience with Shapeways and I was hoping you would throw your two cents in. It is encouraging to know that the quality is better than some of the pictures would indicate.
Lucas & Others,
Hey Paul! That is awesome. Thanks for the response. I knew you had a good deal of personal experience with Shapeways and I was hoping you would throw your two cents in. It is encouraging to know that the quality is better than some of the pictures would indicate.
––All I can say is: “F.U.D. is a wonderful thing!”
Tall Paul
Does anybody know the rules for the British Swordfish and Barracuda pieces?
I know their used for Naval targets, but that is all I remember.
Thanks,
John
Does anybody know the rules for the British Swordfish and Barracuda pieces?
I know their used for Naval targets, but that is all I remember.
Thanks,
John
Are you talking house rules? Otherwise seems they would just use tac rules.
Does anybody know the rules for the British Swordfish and Barracuda pieces?
I know their used for Naval targets, but that is all I remember.
Thanks,
John
Are you talking house rules? Otherwise seems they would just use tac rules.
Yes, HBG had some house rules on a wargamereport.com, but it is down now, and I haven’t finished jotting all the rules, like I should have, and wanted to know if any of you had written down these rules? :-)
Yes, HBG had some house rules on a wargamereport.com, but it is down now, and I haven’t finished jotting all the rules, like I should have, and wanted to know if any of you had written down these rules? :-)
Sorry John, I do not.
Yes, HBG had some house rules on a wargamereport.com, but it is down now, and I haven’t finished jotting all the rules, like I should have, and wanted to know if any of you had written down these rules? :-)
Sorry John, I do not.
No problem! Coach or someone on here is bound to have them. :-)
