"Matching scales, what's the point?" Topic

I'm new to 28mm, being a 6mm man for years and this whole scale matching thing seems more trouble than it's worth.

Having just purchased Napoleonic Brits from Perry and Victrix, I'm pleased to see they look fine side by side but I can't help thinking we've got it all wrong.
I've been asking about on a few forums regarding scale matching and I now realise it's ridiculous, where's the realism in an army of 6 foot soldiers, are they all guardsmen?

For instance, I'm 5'11, my best mate is 6'3, my brother is 5'8 and my grandad is 5'4.

Surely the only issue is bulk, I'd love to see a manufacturer testing the water and producing a range that reflects the fact that we're all different sizes.

What are your thoughts?

Cheers

Matt

If weapons are out of scale, then everything else looks wrong.

For instance, I'm 5'11, my best mate is 6'3, my brother is 5'8 and my grandad is 5'4.

The standard deviation for modern Americans is apparently about 2.8 inches ( link ) which overstates things because the US is particularly mixed racially and this includes people of different ages. Armies tend to exclude the weak and infirm, so let's say 10 cm as a very generous estimate. That means 95% of people are within 20 cm of the mean. That's plus or minus 3 mm on a 25mm figure. Remembering that most people would be close to the mean, not at the extremes, and our standard deviation is on the high side.

Very few ranges have all the figures exactly the same height. There is already some height variation in the order of a couple of millimeters.

If you have mixed manufacturers where they differ in average height by more than a millimeter, then you are not reproducing the real world, but a ridiculous one where people are either 160 cm or 180 cm, but rarely in between.

I always try to mix figures, but only if the bulk of the men look very similar. People just aren't that different ( assuming they are healthy, the same age and the same race ) . What tends to happen is we remember the unusual. I note you didn't list the 100 people you know who are almost exactly your height. I think of my workmates of my age, sex and race, and almost none are more than 10 cm taller or shorter than me.

Some good points raised.

I should have emphasised the point that I was focusing on days gone by where height and weight were governed by diet and lifestyle.
The average British soldier today stands at 5'9, his officers 5'11.
in 1880, the ranker was normally a slum dweller or country boy and looking at contemporary accounts, 5'4 and 5'9 stand out more often than any other height, their pre-military lifestyles made a difference.
The officers of course were taller then too.
Take the Japanese male of today for instance – 5'8, 60 years ago you could knock at least 3 inches off that.
Is this accurately reflected in WW2 sculpts or do they see eye to eye with their enemies?

My point is, providing weapons are to scale, a 28mm range average from whenever to 1940ish could quite easily be either 25 or 28mm and a mm either side in some cases.

I began to wonder when searching for a Napoleon figure in 28mm and realised that if oversized, he wouldn't be Napoleon at all.

Another case – zulus and British by any manufacturer are similarly proportioned, why?
The Brits were averaging 5'5 and the Zulus nigh on 6'0, that couple of mm matters I reckon.

Cheers

Matt

"My point is, providing weapons are to scale"

And therein lies the problem.

I don't have a problem with figures being different heights or widths, but when their rifles are different lengths (or their packs are hugely different dimensions), it just looks stupid.

Matthew83, you are so right.

The weapons might indeed be of different sizes, but from gaming distance (1 metre+ / 3+ feet+) this really isn't a factor. Especially if you're gaming with scales smaller than 54mm.

Biggest problem might be that some manufacturers tend to make more robust figures while some more lean ones.

Exactly right. Why are grenadiers always the same height as voltiguers? Heavy cavalrymen were large, light cavalry small. Still mixing 18mm en toto with 15mm figures is outside the norms.

…are similarly proportioned, why?

Three reasons:

First, manufacturers aren't that fastidious.

Second, manufacturers think the gaming public isn't that fastidious and would complain or require never-ending reiterated explanation.

Third, size as scale is confusing, no one can state definitively what it means at all, much less how it should be applied in a given set of circumstances.

Lazy collectors won't mind their figures not matching (and won't bother to harmonise them) – and lazy manufacturers will continue to pocket the revenue.

With reference to body size figure height, whilst it is true that people come in all different shapes and sizes, soldiers tend to be fitter and it is not unknown for bigger men to be creamed off for special units (so evening up heights compared to the non-military norm).

That said, the most important point is that the miniaturised unit is trying to create an illusion of reality, not reality itself. If an authentic mix of shapes and sizes _looks wrong, then the illusion of 'reality' is better served by a less varied mix.

I totally agree about weapons and equipment. Weapons should all be the same size. Headgear hardly increases in outer size with head size (mostly the adjustment is on the inside) and the cap badges _are all the same size. If I mix manufacturers where weapons and equipment are not of the same size, I use conversions and separate heads to achieve a sort of convergence. Big figures then just become big men. Etc.

> Surely the only issue is bulk, I'd love to see a manufacturer testing the water and producing a range that reflects the fact that we're all different sizes.

> What are your thoughts?

No – as in your second contribution, the issue is getting weapons and equipment to scale. I think the illusion of realistically varied people will probably then by better served by having them all the same (but I think if you have consistently scaled hats (helmets), (shields) and weapons, few people will notice anyway ) …

The customer is king in all this. If a manufacturer makes a range you don't like, don't buy it. Over the years I think wargamers have been so desperate to fill gaps in their collections, get 'easy to paint' figures etc. that the market has become comparatively undiscriminating (any old dross will do so long as it can be painted easily, _said to look good, and go down on the table – paper flags, shield decals and all …).

If, as the customer, you don't discriminate, the market will continue to serve you up the same quality of product …

Phil

A reminder, 28mm is a size, not a scale.

Yesthatphil,
All true, but as I read TMP the biggest gripe I see is almost always price. I've tried to argue that quality trumps price on minis you are going to take a year to paint and own for 40 years, but to no avail. So if price is your #1 concern, dross it is.

If, as the customer, you don't discriminate, the market will continue to serve you up the same quality of product …

Phil

Absolutely agree Phil.

I read a fantastic article today about the "Patty Hearst Factor" in IT. To summarise it argued that many IT departments succumbed to a form of Stockholm syndrome with their IT providers – especially poor providers – partly coming about through fear that to change the situation would see services, support, updates etc withdrawn or support costs increase.

I'd followed this particular discussion on TMP whilst on the way into work and I couldnt help after reading the article, draw the conclusion that wargaming has this same "Patty Hearst Factor."

I think that the fact the Perry's, Rolf Hedges, Martin Goddard for some all produce figures that are almost invariably the same height and build demonstrates their skill, ability and customer care.

Cheers
Mark