| ghostdog | 21 Dec 2008 8:45 a.m. PST |
I have seen the new picormies in 1:600 scale. They look interesting, but I would like to know if there is clearly an advantage versus the 2mm armies (i think that should be about 1:900 scale) in the looking, the details, etc… To all of you interesting in microarmies, is there a clearly advantage in choosing 1:600 over 1:300? are a clear diference between 1:600 armies and 2mm armies? thanks very much for your info |
| CPT Jake | 21 Dec 2008 9:19 a.m. PST |
I like the 1:600 (and have modern US and modern Iranian forces painted and based). I make a platoon base in most cases ans put the actual number of vehicles in the platoon on that base. I've had some Irregular 2mm stuff in the past, I think the newer 1:600 is a LOT more detailed and beleive you'll find the ranges are more complete (and growing!). I'm not sure of an actual advantage of 1:600 versus 1:300, except a 1:1 Iranian Mech Brigade would have cost me a LOT more. Jake |
| ghostdog | 21 Dec 2008 9:30 a.m. PST |
thaks for your answer. can you use 1:600 vehicles individually? thanks |
| CPT Jake | 21 Dec 2008 10:23 a.m. PST |
The vehicles are tiny. I would say you could use them individually, but it may be a pain, especially if you did not base them. 1:300 would be better for that I would think. picture picture picture picture The above are some pictures of some of mine. Most of the platoon bases are medium Flames of War sized, so you can see how tiny they are. Jake |
| Kaoschallenged | 21 Dec 2008 10:25 a.m. PST |
I use 1/600th for my Coastal,Air and Ground gaming. My 1/600th Wargaming Yahoo Group link |
| Martin Rapier | 21 Dec 2008 11:37 a.m. PST |
I'd only really go for 2mm or 1/600th if I was going to do bases with multiple vehicles, which largely negates the cost advantage. Having a very large investment in 1/300th also makes the smaller scale less attractive, maybe for a new period/theatre. |
| CPT Jake | 21 Dec 2008 12:10 p.m. PST |
I don't know… GHQ: a pack of 5 tanks is about 10 bucks. Call that 2 bucks a tank/stand. O8 1:600 stuff: Pack of 15 tanks $4.25 USD With 3 tanks per stand you get 5 stands at less than a buck each… You still come out ahead (assuming GHQ). Jake |
GildasFacit  | 21 Dec 2008 1:01 p.m. PST |
Detail on the OO range of 3mm is much superior to the IM range of 2mm and rivals the older ranges of 1/300th. Using them without bases would IMHO be impossible. If you are looking at rules that use 1:1 for vehicles then 3mm are not the best choice but for rules where a base is a larger unit they are better (again IMHO). |
 miniMo  | 21 Dec 2008 1:37 p.m. PST |
Even with the high detailed GHQ, never mind the lumpy 1/300 stuff, ID'ing different vehicle variations on the tabletop is very tricky. PzIII's & IV's w/o sideskirts are indistinguishable. Even spotting short vs. long barrelled versions is tricky when your camouflage and weathering goes well with the basing like it ought to. Distinct paint differences and basing indicators are critical (e.g. all my Pz.IV short-barrels get a little clump of foliage on their base). I couldn't imagine playing with 1/600 unless they were used as braille bumps on counters that otherwise provided all the ID information. |
| Union Jack Jackson | 21 Dec 2008 2:29 p.m. PST |
What about basing the vehicles individually on 1/2" bases instead of 1". You could play really big Spearhead games in much less space. |
| Martin Rapier | 22 Dec 2008 1:42 a.m. PST |
"You still come out ahead (assuming GHQ). " Not if you use H&R, NavWar and Scotia, 40p (which is around 40c these days!) each. Even better if you have a huge haul from eBay. The trouble with really tiny bases thuogh is that I have huge fat fingers and it is very hard to move itty little bits around. Cost is a bit of a red herring thuogh, the main 'cost' of any mini is the time it takes to paint, base and organise it. As I said, if I do a new period like ultra moderns or something I might have a look at the smaller stuff. |
| Deserter | 22 Dec 2008 1:53 a.m. PST |
I find that 1/600 WW2 by OO are – beautiful – models, but really tiny! (I painted and based a number of them… early war, 4-5 vehicles per base.) Personally I prefer 1/300 even if less detailed… but maybe they are ok for Modern, 2-3 per base (bigger vehicles = more recognizable)… |
| Deserter | 22 Dec 2008 1:54 a.m. PST |
PS I use 1:600 aircrafts for aerial games…and even for air support to my 1:300… and I'm pretty happy… |
| plasticaddict | 22 Dec 2008 3:25 a.m. PST |
CPT Jake, What basing material / technique are you using for those? It looks great! |
| CPT Jake | 22 Dec 2008 1:21 p.m. PST |
I bought a big bag of some papermache pwder stuff from a model shop that had rail road stuff a LONG time ago. It is white powder. I mix it with a little water and some brown craft paint to make a goop and spread it on the bases. I let the goop dry and then heavy dry brushed with a tan/off white craft paint. I then stuck the vehicles on with white glue. My 6 year old daughter helped with everything except putting on the vehicles. I used Litko FoW bases, medium for most platoons and BDE HQ, small for dismounts and BN HQ and some other things like recon sections. I recently rebased the artillery batteries onto large bases to give them a better dispersion. |
| Greg B | 22 Dec 2008 1:33 p.m. PST |
Ghostdog, I was (and still am) a big 6mm gamer, but I have to say I tried the 2mm stuff and was hooked. While the detail attained by the Oddzial Osmy (sp? – apologies if wrong) is astounding the main advantage is for a game where each piece is a platoon, it really looks like a platoon, and the large formations start to look and feel like entire regiments etc. The stuff looks great – "braille bumps" is way, way off. picture picture So I would say there is a clear difference – not superior, as each has advantages, but a solid difference. Good luck! Greg |
| CPT Jake | 22 Dec 2008 1:44 p.m. PST |
Greg, your stuff looks darned good. I agree, the "braille bumps" comment is way off base. My bradleys look just like bradleys, my abrams look liike abrams, and so on. |
| ghostdog | 22 Dec 2008 1:49 p.m. PST |
thanks very much. I own a wwii german army in 1:300 scale, and lot of buildings… I was tempted by 2mm, but I didnīt like the infantry stands… so I began to look to 1:600… thanks again for your input |
| new guy | 25 Dec 2008 12:59 p.m. PST |
I'm still a 1/285th 1/300 gamer for the detail. Actually we've enlarged a bit to include 1/220 "Z" scale figures and vehicles. Yes I know the transport in this picture is a WW 2 era vehicle but it is the only thing available right now so I went with it… picture With some care you can skirmish game in 1/285th. The vehicles are old GHQ and the figures are H&R Pz Grenadiers. picture In the picture below you can see a real mix of building scales, vehicle scales, and figure scales. They vary from 1/220 to 1/300 but work well overall I think. picture At least they work for our simulations for the Army and Marines. I/S |
| Bill Owen | 28 Dec 2008 6:33 p.m. PST |
Union Jack Jackson wrote: What about basing the vehicles individually on 1/2" bases instead of 1".
---
Yes, my idea is to mount 3mm tanks each on a centimeter square magnetic base, each representing a platoon …then place them on a 1x1.5" steel stand… the company. The company stand has the orders built into it. Can play Command Decision this way… and as Martin Rapier noted, I'm doing it in a whole new theatre (North Africa) that requires different bases anyway. But so far, no Italian equipment. The obvious point is that you can buy a huge amount of stuff for about 14-25% the cost; range is because you can buy 15 cheaper than 1 or 3 from:
picoarmor.com When I get to testing this, I will post at my CD site:
g-design.us/cd |
