Imperial compared to Regal (1 Viewer)

[Squiggle]

Hi all,

Does anyone have sets of both Imperial and Regal figures - how do they compare? Preferences?

They seem very similar - both clean, exacting glossy paint jobs, both from New Zealand, and somewhere I may
have read some of the same people worked for both companies. Regal has a bigger catalogue.
I have placed my first order for Regal figures - some Celts; I picked these because they are wonderfully animated,
with unique paint jobs - besides the neat tattoos, they have the traditional basic glossy paint job - but with chest hair added! Awesome!
Imperial seems to have quite a following, and I wonder if that is because certain qualities they have? At some point when I can
afford an Imperial set, I can compare the two manufactures myself.

 

[nysoldiers]

Imperial figures are thinner and sculpted with finer features. While I have a very large collection of Regal/Soldiers of the World and appreciate them, I would say they are
more "toy like" than Imperial. Many of the Imperial figures have moveable arms while Regal's are solid cast.
Another feature of Imperial is that they have a smaller base. Harder to set up in mass as you can get the domino effect if one falls!

 

[Drum]

Very much agree with nysoldiers’ post, with the possible exception of the comment about the bases of the IP figures.
(I have a preference for the IP horse sculpts without bases as well as the smaller IP bases for individual soldiers, while certainly trippier, are much less obtrusive and permit closer formations where it doesn’t look like the troops are rafting on green ice cubes.)

In my humble (terribly biased) opinion, in terms of quality craftsmanship, there is simply no comparison between the two makers.

Anyone who has both, please post pics. Especially if anyone has one of the many Regal sets that are more or less direct copies of Imperial sets. Side by side, the differences are quite clear.

Cheers,
Drum