Help support TMP


"Why Go Smaller Than 15mm? (Final Round)" Topic


10 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.

Please remember that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Return to the Why Go Smaller Than 15mm? (Final Round) Poll


Areas of Interest

General

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Recent Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Lemax Christmas Trees

It's probably too late already this season to snatch these bargains up...


Featured Workbench Article

Painting Lions

Continuing our 'animals' theme, Stronty Girl Fezian tackles a pair of lionesses.


Featured Profile Article

New Computer for Editor Dianna

Time to replace the equipment again!


Current Poll


381 hits since 27 Mar 2015
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Mako1127 Mar 2015 5:04 a.m. PST

So, no "all of the above option"?

Who asked this joker27 Mar 2015 5:40 a.m. PST

More affordable so you have money for other things like taking care of the family. grin

Skeets Supporting Member of TMP27 Mar 2015 7:17 a.m. PST

Don't go smaller than 25/28's, I tried smaller figures years ago when they first came out, Scruby's I believe. I didn't like them then and still don't. Just personal preference I guess.

Pictors Studio27 Mar 2015 7:26 a.m. PST

I like them because you can get more figures on the table and you can have grand scale battles. It is tough doing ECW in 28mm or even 15mm and doing some of the bigger battles. In 10mm it looks great, you get a lot of figures on the table and you can have the correct number of units.

The uniforms weren't so fantastic that you get as much benefit out of the bigger figures as you do in other periods. Also when you look at contemporary maps of the period the set up on the table looks just like them.

GildasFacit Sponsoring Member of TMP27 Mar 2015 8:58 a.m. PST

Although I'd have taken the 'all of the above' option too it is storage space that made the biggest difference to me.

I have never really done anything bigger than 15mm – a few skirmish forces, mostly never finished because I got bored painting them.

Once I had got about halfway through painting the early medieval I had collected I realised that I had barely enough space to store them and no space to expand. That's when I switched to 2mm and only later, when more space became available, to 6mm and 10mm.

If I want big battles I need space to store as well as play with them – 15mm might work on the table but takes up too much storage space so, for me that is still what mostly makes 2, 3, 6 and 10mm the most viable options for me.

Personal logo McKinstry Supporting Member of TMP Fezian27 Mar 2015 10:32 a.m. PST

I agree with most of the reasons but the grand scale look of the games are my core reason.

Mithmee27 Mar 2015 11:49 a.m. PST

All of these reasons.

Toronto4827 Mar 2015 1:49 p.m. PST

Can't pick just one most if not all apply to mr

Continental Air Force29 Mar 2015 2:22 p.m. PST

It makes my junk look huge in comparison

Baccus 6mm30 Mar 2015 3:22 a.m. PST

It is interesting that the option for 6mm being cheaper garners only 9% of the poll. Wargamers who have never used 6mm will tell you that in their opinion it can be only reason to go small. In fact the leading options centre around the aesthetic and practical appeal of small scales.

I would agree that just choosing one option creates a false impression as I too would have taken the 'all of the above' option for this and probably for the first round.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.