chrach7 | 11 May 2016 12:09 p.m. PST |
I'd like to do some large cold war gone hot battles using FFT3 but I prefer doing 1:1 so I would need about 3 tanks per base. At 6mm, this makes a reasonably sized base a bit crowded (assuming 2 inch by 1.5 inch base approx). 3mm would look more natural, but I'm not sure if I'm willing to accept the decrease in sculpt quality. The GHQ 6mm stuff is beautiful on their website vs the lumpy 3mm pico armor. I have never seen pico armor in person, does it look better on the table that on the seller's website? |
Extra Crispy | 11 May 2016 12:21 p.m. PST |
I think it's quite good for the size. But frankly if you really want that kind of detail you have to go 6mm. At 1:600 "lumpy" is the point – it is meant to be recognizable at 3', not at 6". Pretty sure you can order a sample pack and see what you think. |
cloudcaptain | 11 May 2016 12:22 p.m. PST |
Pico looks better in person. The only caveat to that is that with barrels they have to have a piece of metal to support them. It generally runs the length of the barrel and touches the hull. You can see and example here on Beast's Blog: link If painted correctly it is unnoticeable. Personally I think they look as good as most 6mm…better than some actually. |
Joes Shop | 11 May 2016 12:36 p.m. PST |
|
Weasel | 11 May 2016 1:37 p.m. PST |
Pico armour looks fantastic in person. i can't express enough how great the little tanks are. |
valerio | 11 May 2016 1:53 p.m. PST |
Yes I have seen them and are very good. I am too thinking of doing either 6 or 3mm… For 8 months now. Can t decide |
boy wundyr x | 11 May 2016 1:58 p.m. PST |
I wouldn't call 3mm lump either, I use it singly based in some projects. It also fits better with the game scale you're looking at, it's inherent scale is 1"=50'. It's also way, way, cheaper – you can get 30 tanks in 3mm and money to spare vs. a five-pack from GHQ. And I'm speaking as someone who has both 3 and 6mm, 3mm for bigger scale games, 6mm for a company per side. |
Grignotage | 11 May 2016 2:08 p.m. PST |
Pico makes some fantastic models. Love those little tanks. |
Mooseworks8 | 11 May 2016 2:11 p.m. PST |
Can't recommend PicoArmor enough. Their O8 range and customer service are excellent. |
MiniPatton | 11 May 2016 2:58 p.m. PST |
I've got quite a bit of the 3mm stuff painted up – looks fantastic on the table and I have it based at 1:1. I can easily discern what each model is when I am playing. The quality is very high and the sculpts show pretty good detail considering the size. They are not GHQ, but they aren't lumps either. |
Mako11 | 11 May 2016 2:59 p.m. PST |
The Pico armor is quite nice, and looks fairly decent based as units, though a bit small for my tastes, and I prefer 1:1 ratio of real vehicles to minis. Doesn't mean you can't do 1:1, but I generally dislike bases for my armor, and 1/300th is about as small as I want to go for land-based minis, unless they're targets for aircraft. For the latter, 1/600th vehicles are superb, when paired with either 1/600th aircraft, or larger aircraft too. |
Dynaman8789 | 11 May 2016 3:44 p.m. PST |
I saw some 1/600 stuff at one of the conventions and it was darned impressive. |
coopman | 11 May 2016 5:31 p.m. PST |
Check out this gamer's 3mm stuff: link |
williamb | 12 May 2016 10:09 a.m. PST |
If I didn't already have a fairly extensive collection of 6mm in various periods including armor I would be buying the 3mm tanks. I would still only put one vehicle on a base instead of multiple vehicles as tanks usually operate at 50 to 100 meters between vehicles or 3-6 inches at 1:600 scale. link |
Cold Warrior | 12 May 2016 11:36 a.m. PST |
I sold all my 6mm some years back to get into 3mm, and honestly don't regret it at all. Have well over a thousand modern vehicles and aircraft, and I could only do a fraction of that with the cost of GHQ. They look quite good up close, Marcin at 08 has done a tremendous job with sculpting in this scale, and he has a very reliable monthly release schedule. My only caveat is I don't know if WWII will be too small in this scale, particularly early war, but if a UAZ-469 looks that good in 3mm, have no doubt the smaller tanks for WWII will as well. Purchase a sample pack from John at Pico, that's how I made up my mind. Small price to pay for being sure this is the route you wish to go. However is money is not an issue, can't go wrong with GHQ and CinC if detail is more important than cost savings. |
Mute Bystander | 13 May 2016 2:27 a.m. PST |
I find 3mm my smaller "go to" scale – where they have coverage – which is not WSS/7YW unfortunately. OOT – Larger size (other than legacy) is 15mm for almost everything not covered by legacy armies. Other than mass battle (Bugs) or really large battles in SF, 3mm is my preference for anything post SCW. I really like my 6mm SF but if/when 3mm covers that adequately I will have a strong drive to changeover to 3mm. YMMV. |
kmahony111 | 13 May 2016 2:25 p.m. PST |
Like you say, GHQ is amazing, and puts a lot of 10mm and 15mm stuff to shame. Something to consider is the size of you table and ground scale. Would you use the same for 3mm and 6mm? |
chrach7 | 14 May 2016 4:49 a.m. PST |
I can set up a 12 ft by 6 ft table if needed for Fistful of Tows 3. I want to have a 1:1 vehicle representation, so I will have to put 3-5 vehicles per base which probably wouldn't look right with 6mm vehicles (or require a large base). |
Rod I Robertson | 14 May 2016 3:11 p.m. PST |
What does pico infantry look like? Most web piccies I've seen show little definition and detail and they must be a devil to paint. The word Braille comes to mind! But the vehicles en mass look great. Do you mount vehicles and dismounted infantry on the same base or different bases at this scale? Cheers. Rod Robertson |
NavyVet | 15 May 2016 8:28 p.m. PST |
Pico infantry is very detailed for the size. You can see the human form and the weapons it is carrying. I base the infantry separate . When they dismount I place their base in front of the carrier. |