Help support TMP


"Advantages of Scale?" Topic


19 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Not found! Message Board

Back to the WWII Discussion Message Board



Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land

2,405 hits since 19 Oct 2004
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Trousers Moran Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 7:44 a.m. PST

Hi

I am looking at WWII, and was wondering what advantages people felt there were to the various scales, 6mm is too small for me, but I am considering 10mm, 15mm, 20mm and 28mm.

Personal logo Patrick R Supporting Member of TMP19 Oct 2004 8:00 a.m. PST

28mm : Detail and pretty minis. Only good for skirmish games. Can be expensive If you want to field anything larger than a platoon of infantry.
20mm : If you are looking for a 1928 Hungarian Zblkdradz truck, you can find it. Good for skirmish and larger scale games.
15mm : Good compromise scale for skirmish and larger games. Because it's all metal and resin, some models are more expensive than 20mm scale kits.
10mm : Nice small scale alternative for 6mm. Infantry is more detailed. Good for large scale games, less so for skirmish games with individuals. Cheaper than 15mm.

Ditto Tango 2 1 Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 8:08 a.m. PST

I think patrick did good job of summing it up. Though there are people who play large representation scale (division level type games) with 28mm!

One thing he left out was the modeling aspect. If you are a plastic modeler, IMO, 20mm is perfect as it allows you to combine both hobbies. Also, if you are leery about the weird dimesions so many wargames figure manufacturers like to sculpt their figures with (huge heads, stumpy limbs, massive hands and weapons that look like telephone poles) 20mm, aka 1:72/6 scale is the way to go.

My wife, an artist who does some sculpting, BTW, was looking at the latest WI (the one with the WAB adaptation for WWII Soviets) articles and adverts and remarked that all the figures looked like Cotton Hill from Fox's (a US TV station) 'King of the Hill' (one of my favourite cartoons - I'm 41 and still love cartoons - this and Southpark are my main staples of TV watching!). Cotton Hill is a WWII vet whose shins were shot off ("by the Tojos!" he claims) and his feet re-attached to his knees.

Some people like these sorts of figures. I guess you can tell I'm not partial to them. But that's just me.

Mobius19 Oct 2004 8:19 a.m. PST

Tim. that's the feeling I get when I see many of those larger figures. Looks like they took a dwarf body and stuck a human head and helmet on it. Sure they are nice looking and easier to see on a game table. But, the body parts aren't even in scale with each other.

Ram Kangaroo19 Oct 2004 8:29 a.m. PST

People are asking about scaling all the time (and I'm still one of them I guess) but what it really boils down to is that you have to decide what you want to do with them.

Sit down and just think about how you like to play and what pleases you. What results do you want to achieve? Are you more interested in the game or is figure display just as important. What about expense and what do you have now that could complement what you're looking at playing with.

I love the look of 28 mm figures and love painting and detailing them. However, due to the expense and time I'm limiting my 28mm Naps to those games with less than epic scales (Shako etc). For the grand tactical games where I prefer the density of figures I have gone with 10mm. I could have gone with 6mm but it was my personal feeling that I enjoy the 10mm size more. 6mm would have been more economical in terms of cost and time and would have certainly provided a denser look, but 10mm just turns my crank.

Now, the time came when I wanted a small diversion from Naps and WWII is my next favourite era. I wanted only a minor investment since it was just to relieve any stagnation.

28mm was out as the expense in money and time was prohibitive for me. 1/72 scale was out as I was doing that challenge in Napoleonics already. I seriously looked at micro armour (6mm) but then realised that I already had 10mm terrain from my Napoleonics (I know, three Nap scales ... sheesh)i.e. instant terrain and buildings! I hunted around for a game that would be figure light and a good match for my scale. I found a division level game that was perfect for my needs and also realised that the basing could be used fairly readily for Crossfire, another favourite game.

Overall, I'm extremely satisfied with my choice of 10mm for WWII as it meets all my needs quite handily. It took a bit of time and agonising but I'm confident I will be more than happy with the path I've chosen. Good luck.

Sorry for the length.

Sir Able Brush Supporting Member of TMP19 Oct 2004 9:09 a.m. PST


Patrick R

Just done the search on the Zblkdradz truck - no joy.

Sigh.

79thPA Supporting Member of TMP19 Oct 2004 9:10 a.m. PST

I agree with the above comments. It depends on the scale of action you want to play, how much you are willing to spend and what part of the war you want to game. If I was to start fresh, I'd probably agme in two scales; 10/12mm for division size actions, and 20mm for smaller actions.

Boone Doggle Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 9:19 a.m. PST

Plenty of good comments above. I boil my thoughts down to this

28mm if you like painting figures

20mm if you like building model tanks

15mm if you want to play FOW

6/10mm if you want the visual of many units on the tabletop

Bad Painter19 Oct 2004 10:17 a.m. PST

Let's not forget scale "creep". I have some old (circa 1976) 25 mm figures that aren't much bigger than the 20 mm of today. Many of the current 28 mm are really 33 or 34 mm. My friend Patrick R is a fan of 10 mm, but there really isn't a scale he doesn't like. I guess it's what size units you really are interested in gaming with.
Patrick did a very good job of summarizing the pros and cons of the various scales.

Ram Kangaroo19 Oct 2004 10:38 a.m. PST


or 6/10mm if you want to shrink your playing surface

Ditto Tango 2 1 Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 10:52 a.m. PST

Actually Bad Painter, according to my old Battle magazines from about '74 or so, 20mm = 1:76 and 25mm = 1:72.

No kidding.

Landorl19 Oct 2004 11:23 a.m. PST

I agree with 79thPA. I used to have 15mm for skirmish and 6mm(1/285) for larger scaled battles. I disliked both because they were too small for what I wanted. I changed to 20mm & 10mm, and have been quite pleased.

28mm looks nice, but expensive. Also, 15mm can get expensive if you are building large forces.

The Black Wash Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 11:47 a.m. PST

Who makes 10 mm WWII?

Personal logo Patrick R Supporting Member of TMP19 Oct 2004 11:50 a.m. PST

10mm Manufacturers include (you can look them all up in the aptly named "Manufacturer's directory" on this very site.

Pendraken, Minifigs (although some call them 12mm), Wargames South, Perrin and Noble.

Personal logo Patrick R Supporting Member of TMP19 Oct 2004 11:54 a.m. PST

Two things :

1) The price varies on what kind of game you are playing. If you play "miniature intensive" games with lots of models the price will be higher, but a 28mm infantry platoon for a skirmish game can turn out to be much cheaper than somebody's 15mm armoured battalion.

2) Basing and a unit's footprint are the key to any game. The model on top of the bases are just glorified markers. Some people prefer pretty minis like 28mm to make the game look good, but a 1/48th scale model has such a huge footprint it's not very good if you play large scale games.

Cpt Arexu Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 1:14 p.m. PST

Word, Patrick. My 15mm Russian Infantry Battalion was pretty pricey, though I bought it in parts over time.

I think in terms of a standard 4x6foot table size to determine scale vs figures. On a 4x6 table I can field:

A squad to a platoon on each side with plastic army men

A platoon each or so in 28mm

Platoons to a company in 20mm

Company to Battalion in 15mm

I don't have any 10mm, but would think battalion+ each side

Godzilla vs everything human available in 6mm

Godzilla and other monsters vs eachother in ~1/700

ignarzpop Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 7:55 p.m. PST

Tim: I like the Cotton Hill reference! My wife thought that they just remustered the left-over dwarves from D&D and put them in WW2 uniforms....

greedo1379 Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 9:12 p.m. PST

"Actually Bad Painter, according to my old Battle magazines from about '74 or so, 20mm = 1:76 and 25mm = 1:72."

See, I have always been confused about you guys calling 1/72s 20mm. Assume the height of the average man is 6ft. 6ft = 72in, 1/72(scale)*72 = 1in tall figure = 25.4mm.

Although that would be height toe to top of head rather than toe to eye.

The Fighter Ace Inactive Member19 Oct 2004 10:51 p.m. PST

Recently changed from 1/72 to 15mm. Had trouble rectifying the table size with the actual range of a Panther's L28. 15mm somehow looks better in this aspect with 10mm coming up behind (but jeez, how do you paint that small?).

Also, be aware, that whatever scale you choose, you'll need terrain to back it up. Then you need to store all that terrain. This can get really heavy in larger scales as invariably, people always need more terrain, but have limited storage available. Keep this in mind when choosing.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.