Uesugi Kenshin | 15 Jul 2010 3:58 a.m. PST |
|
Markup | 15 Jul 2010 4:16 a.m. PST |
6mm/1:300. The former is a size, the latter a scale. Unless you own a dance hall or a football pitch. Skirmish games. Any size you want. |
Martin Rapier | 15 Jul 2010 4:25 a.m. PST |
Tactical/skirmish – 15mm Grand tactical/operational – 6mm Well, that is what I do anyway. "Unless you own a dance hall or a football pitch." I generally use 1/300th as the ground scale for tactical games, 12" = 100 yards, so if you play with 6mm the whole thing is 1:1. I find 15mm easier on the eyes for that level of game though. |
AGamer | 15 Jul 2010 4:31 a.m. PST |
Operational 6mm or 15mm – depends on the amount of armor. Skirmish, typically 28mm. |
CPBelt | 15 Jul 2010 4:51 a.m. PST |
Each has its pluses and minuses. 10mm hasto be the weakest because not much out there. Some wonderful 1/35 stuff but not enough for gaming. 1/72 or 20mm is missing. You really need to research that if you want to do moderns and then decide. Plus, in 1/72 you get all the great armor models and kits from companies like Dragon, which make 15mm armor look like rough metal blobs. I wrestle between 1/72, 15mm, and 25mm. |
Pictors Studio | 15 Jul 2010 4:59 a.m. PST |
I like 28mm for skirmish stuff but if I were going to do it seriously I think I'd opt for 6mm. Lots of stuff out there and you can get the ranges to look a little bit more reasonable. |
CPT Jake | 15 Jul 2010 5:03 a.m. PST |
I like 15mm for skirmish and up to a company per side on the table. I use 1:600 for big battles. The figures are fantastic and look great based as platoons. Jake |
Uesugi Kenshin | 15 Jul 2010 5:25 a.m. PST |
"1/72 or 20mm is missing." Absolutely correct. My bad! |
Wartopia | 15 Jul 2010 5:44 a.m. PST |
Battalion level (1 stand = 1 platoon): 6mm Small Unit Level (figure ratio 1:1): 20mm IMO 15mm falls between the stools. Too small to ID individual weapon types for skirmish or small unit gaming and too big for epic scale combined arms battles with a large variety of vehicles. Another consideration is vehicle availability. In 6mm (1/285 or 1/300) you can find just about anything you want. Same with 20mm (1/72 and 1/76). Many vehicles are tough to find for use with 15mm (1/100) and 28mm (1/48). Manufacturers such as QRF have dramatically improved the situation for 15mm gamers but 28mm gamers still lack a lot of key vehicles. |
herpaderpaderp | 15 Jul 2010 5:45 a.m. PST |
I prefer 15mm, its a nice compromise scale and allows you to get alot painted to a very nice standard quite fast. although I love the models in 6mm GHQ puts out, I struggle to paint them as anything apart from green + drybrushing. |
Thomas Whitten | 15 Jul 2010 6:05 a.m. PST |
Skirmish 28mm Operational 6mm |
kabrank | 15 Jul 2010 6:18 a.m. PST |
I use both 6mm and 20mm. 6mm for mass armour and large scale tactical games. 20mm for skirmish and Battalion scale games Tried 10mm to do both but in the end decided needed the above scales to achieve what I was looking for. |
Irish Marine | 15 Jul 2010 6:57 a.m. PST |
28mm, I've invested too much in it but if I had to do it all over it would be 20mm there is way too much out there not to. |
The Nigerian Lead Minister | 15 Jul 2010 7:27 a.m. PST |
I have 6mm, but I'm thinking of changing to 15mm for most of it. Vehicles are fine in 6mm and it's the way to put a lot of armor on the table, but we're always losing 6mm infantry, even if they are on stands. |
leidang | 15 Jul 2010 8:05 a.m. PST |
I have modern stuff in 28mm, 15mm, and 6mm. It is the only era I have broke my one scale per period rule for. 28mm – Small scale skirmish (10-30 figs per side) 15mm – Medium scale actions (Mogadishu, An Nasariyah, Baghdad Thunder Run, etc) 6mm – Large operations (Al Khafji, Cold War / WWIII, Iraq Invasion, etc) |
ComradeCommissar | 15 Jul 2010 8:05 a.m. PST |
Another vote for 20mm, and metal I might add. Some very nice miniatures out there plus the benefit of using 1/72 scale vehicle models and HO scale buildings. |
Darby E | 15 Jul 2010 8:09 a.m. PST |
20mm for skirmish 1/600 for larger sized battles. I've found that 1/600 give a much more realistic "look" to ranges based on unit size. I mean, an M1A1 at 1/600 firing at long range against a T-72 looks right on the gaming table, while at 1/300 it still will look a little close or crowded. 1/600 is also a LOT less expensive than 1/300 or 1/285, while still having great detail. |
dagc54 | 15 Jul 2010 8:50 a.m. PST |
1/285 6mm, to have enough talbe space to play a big Soviet break-through. |
Scorpio | 15 Jul 2010 9:07 a.m. PST |
28mm for skirmish. Looks great on the table. |
Delta Vee | 15 Jul 2010 10:43 a.m. PST |
the scale YOU are most happy painting and collecting. anything else is spending your money on stuff you dont enjoy |
Col Stone | 15 Jul 2010 10:49 a.m. PST |
I've come to the conclusion (for myself) that it's 28mm and nothing else. If i were to pick a second scale, it'd be 1/600, for the reasons Darby posted. Steelpenguin has the absolutely best answer tho :) |
flicking wargamer | 15 Jul 2010 11:45 a.m. PST |
20mm lets you pick up the really nice Forces of Valor vehicles. I am really sad that they decided to cheap out for this last batch rather than stick with the heavy metal ones. Plus there is Dragon Armor and all those nice vehicles. Buildings in HO and PaperTerrain are affordable. Great for skirmish level games. |
cloudcaptain | 15 Jul 2010 2:35 p.m. PST |
1/72 mixed with 20mm. Diecast hotwheels and matchbox. HO train buildings and such. Best bang for your buck. |
Sparker | 15 Jul 2010 10:19 p.m. PST |
I am hopeless at this – I have more scales on the go that T72 tanks in any one scale! I am even condisering getting into 1;50 cos of the beautiful new models out there! Kind Regards, Sparker |
Lowtardog | 16 Jul 2010 3:40 a.m. PST |
28mm for me, though could be tempted to go 1/300 or 1/600 for large dividional games |
UshCha | 16 Jul 2010 3:11 p.m. PST |
After careful consideration of scale I suggeat 12mm/1:144 on the basis of the pieces if you are considering playing on relatively open ground. My reasoning is this:- AT 1/144 you are out model to linear scale by a factor of abot 66. ( 1/44 model 1mm+1m) In terms of linear terrain, features this is acceptable. On typical European terrain you can still get most of the roads, woods and vilages to take up about the right area, length. At this scale you are capable of produceing typical battle ranges of 500 to 1500m of maneover units. Clearly indirect fire support will be off table. Provided the terrain is open, this works well. It is pyysically too small to do urban areas , you can't get you fingers down the roads or put figures in buildings prectically, and the complexity is such that you can practically fight only segments of the battle. Even then area terrain (houses etc, are in fact 25 time (roughly (area scaling)too few. However in practise the feel is good enough (personal opinion is key here) while keeping the bit count to a playable level. In all ost games I have seen that use model 1 tank + 1 platoon the terrain modelling is wholy unrealistic even for linear features and the game for me then has too little conection to the real world to be of interest. Why 144 ; Extensive study of the sizes showed to us that the smalest vehicle we could see using (we chose a Wiesl as a good test case) was sufficently large as to be practical to move and fight on suitable terrain. Being primarily interested in the play/simulation not the models there are sufficient of the main stay opponents to make fielding a typical force practical and afforable. If you interests are more for the models than the play and to field obscure armies for the sake of the models (perfectly reasonable if you are a keen modler) then maybe 1:144 is not for you. Oh and the kit can be realtively cheap and more important many main stream modles are available pre-painted. |
Chuckaroobob | 16 Jul 2010 9:46 p.m. PST |
I have 28mm and 15mm. I dearly love 28's, but it was just too easy to get everything needed in 15mm from QRF & 19th Century. |
bishnak | 17 Jul 2010 4:56 p.m. PST |
It depends on the level of combat you're trying to game. But I'd definitely go with the smaller scale minis for moderns (WW2 as well). They are the only way to give the modern ranges with anything approaching a reasonable ground scale and look 'right', so the table doesn't just comprise hub-to-hub tanks like a big carpark. Personally, I use: 1/300 (6mm) for anything Battalion level and below. Individual vehicles and fire-team / squad basing for infantry (depending on the organisation). 1/600 (3mm) for anything higher level than Battalion level. Platoon basing for vehicles and infantry(ie 3-5 vehicles or 20 – 40 infantry). This lets you do large scale actions at 1" = 100m. cheers, bish |
Kaoschallenged | 17 Jul 2010 5:08 p.m. PST |
1/600-3mm for my Air,Land and Naval of course! For most of the reasons above :). Robert My 1/600-3mm Miniature Wargaming Yahoo Group link 3mm miniatures Yahoo Group link |
French Wargame Holidays | 18 Jul 2010 1:53 a.m. PST |
3 or 6mm for operational 15 or 20mm for tatical 28mm sqaud level skirmish I have had at one time or another all of the scales, currently 20mm and 28mm. I must say i did enjoy AK47 in 15mm in the nineties cheers Matt |
42Alpha | 18 Jul 2010 11:12 a.m. PST |
Ush Cha, I am loathe to question the logic of how a modern miniature looks on the table as I am primarily a naval and air wargamer, but I do not know of any 12mm figures for the modern period?? Who does them and what ranges are available? |
Goose666 | 18 Jul 2010 11:18 a.m. PST |
I love 28mm.. but if considering starting from scratch, costs, availability of mini's. Ranges, diversity of models etc.. 1/72 and 20mm is hard to beat. But i love 28mm.. and sticking with that.. :) |
UshCha | 18 Jul 2010 2:45 p.m. PST |
42 Alpha Minifigs to official 12mm. In reality Pendragon 10mm are a bit oversize and are also 12mm near enough to be mixable. In addtion one or two pre painted platics are available but they don't match the lead and there is not enough variety on there own for even a very standard force. |
Janick | 18 Jul 2010 2:47 p.m. PST |
I use 20mm
as 28mm was getting to expensive for me! |
Lion in the Stars | 18 Jul 2010 7:31 p.m. PST |
15mm, individually based. I'm not really interested in gaming more than a platoon or so per side, so that lets me have a better groundscale than 28mm. |
pigbear | 19 Jul 2010 3:23 a.m. PST |
For skirmish, I'll echo Goose666 in the preference for 28mm along with the recommendation for 20mm. It took me a long time to decide between the two. Considering the new releases in 28mm, I think I made the right choice. For slightly lager actions (team/squad or single vehicle per base), I use 1:600. |
RJV1967 | 19 Jul 2010 2:10 p.m. PST |
Playing WW2 in 6mm and 1:1 scale. Base unit is infantry squad, infantry support weapons team or vehicle. Playing Iraq counter-insurgency in 20mm and 1:1 scale. Base unit is individual soldier or vehicle. |
Tank Chief | 22 Sep 2010 4:11 p.m. PST |
When did 1/72 become 20mm??? if 1/72 is one inch equals six foot, the 25mm (25.4mm) should be its equal. Splain that one to me Lucy. And is a football pitch??? Is that British for soccer field??? Stay on subject Semper-Fi Battle Rats |
Uesugi Kenshin | 22 Sep 2010 6:04 p.m. PST |
For me, after trial and error, 15mm is the best compromise. |
Surferdude | 24 Sep 2010 8:45 a.m. PST |
I use 12mm singles and 28mm singles for most modern stuff – all skirmish squad to platoon sizes. |
Lion in the Stars | 24 Sep 2010 9:29 a.m. PST |
@Ariesseeks: When only recently people are 6 feet tall, and some idjits insist on measuring to the eyes instead of the top of the head. If you took the average Japanese soldier from WW2 (5' even), he'd be 21mm to the top of his head. Roughly 2mm from top of head to eye-level. |
Andy ONeill | 24 Sep 2010 12:11 p.m. PST |
20mm for me. More choice than any scale and I only do skirmish. It's beyond me why Americans chose to call a different game football when the term was already in use. |
PilGrim | 25 Sep 2010 2:28 a.m. PST |
Another vote for 12mm \ 1:144 Minifigs provide infantry and some vehicles, and plastic models from Dragon and Trumpeter are beautiful. And it "looks" right |
Goose666 | 25 Sep 2010 12:54 p.m. PST |
28mm.. one and only ;) But occasionally 20mm.. all skirmish. I hire a hall and run WW2 28mm multi platoon games, for three or so players a side when I want to go larger at the moment. |
Top Gun Ace | 25 Sep 2010 8:47 p.m. PST |
Squads – 25mm/28mm – individually based. Platoons – 15mm – 20mm – individually based preferred; can use fireteam basing if using multiple platoons Companies – 6mm – 12mm – multi-based, by squads or fireteams |
Tank Chief | 27 Sep 2010 5:47 p.m. PST |
20mm has best selection??? Ok
Where. I guess i dont have enough links. I want infantry, trucks AFV, tanks and aircraft. V-22, 53's Gunships
blimps and a donkey cart
LCAC. Buildings. Lots of terrain. WHERE??? |
Uesugi Kenshin | 28 Sep 2010 2:13 a.m. PST |
I would say 15mm, even though there is a dearth of ultra-modern military figures in 15mm. The newer ones posted at Eureka do seem to be making some headway towards closing those gaps (especially the Russians): link |
Wartopia | 28 Sep 2010 4:59 a.m. PST |
6mm Best for Battalion Level+ Games (1 stand = 1 platoon) reason: 6mm has the largest variety of hardware available 20mm Best for Platoon Level+ (basic unit = small team of soldiers) reason: you can still tell what the weapons are and you have a decent selection of 1/72 squad/platoon-level vehicle models 15mm and 25/28mm are non-starters for Battalion+ games since none of the ranges covers all of the vehicles and hardware needed. I tried this in 15mm and it was an utter failure. 15mm isn't very useful for small unit actions if you're interested in individual weapon differences (eg SAW vs GPMG) as the weapons are so tiny and hard to distinguish. But it's perfectly fine for small unit actions if you're abstracting weapon capability as with Force on Force, using squad level stands as in Crossfire, or abstracting squad/platoon capability as in Flames of War. 25/28mm is prefect for squad-level actions since you can really tell the weapons apart. As you move up to platoon and higher it becomes more difficult if you wish to include APCs, IFVs, etc. due both to size and availabilty. |